Why Jesus is necessary for salvation in a tweet

Alan Shlemon has answered that question in the space of a tweet: “There’s only one way to Heaven because there’s only one God that exists who’s made only one offer of forgiveness through His only one Son.”

I don’t understand. Why did you do that? You couldn’t just say that you believe Jesus that is the way to eternal salvation, you had to go and diss the beliefs of 4 billion non-Christian religious people on the planet by insisting that Jesus is the one true God and anyone who believes otherwise is destined to go to hell. “My God is the one true God” is a half step away from the rationalizations that have been used for the past 2500 years to justify the mass slaughter of the non-believers by religious fundamentalists and the governments that support them. The new atheists got that part right. So much for religious tolerance and respect for other beliefs.

Your phrase about a real born again Christian reminds me of the No True Scotsman fallacy. You made what could be called an appeal to purity doctrine as a way to dismiss relevant criticisms or flaws of your argument. However that
s all I will say about that now.

I do submit however that your statement: “Others are judged and can be granted eternal life because of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ.” and here’s why.

Jesus sacrifice was a consequence of the way he lived, the things he did and said and the lessons he showed and knowledge he imparted to mankind. So the consequence did not give us anything; it was his life and knowledge that gave us an understanding of eternal life. So it is not the consequence that showed us the way; it was his life that showed us the way. Using the sacrifice as an excuse is merely pushing the sprinkling of blood doctrine back into vogue as the Mosaic Law of forgiveness of sins and that was wrong from the start.

And by using that blood sacrifice of Jesus, old school Pharisees and Religious Scholars surreptitiously lulled the so called followers of Jesus right back into the erroneous belief in old testament dogma of the religious nonsense of blood sacrifice. The hijackers of Christianity merely transferred the notion of blood from animal to remit sin to the blood of human; namely Jesus scourging and crucifixion, for the remission of sin, both of which flowed from the folly of false beliefs by men made stupid by religious insanity.

Because blood reconciles nothing but it does create cleverly crafted justification for senseless death and was done to appease the mythological gods for a bumper crop or to ward off the wrath of natural storms, famines, drought, disease and earthquakes caused by angry gods. Jesus throughout his life tried to save the downtrodden from the ancient mindsets which, if nothing else but highly uneducated compared to an elementary student in today’s society.

Religion doctrinal falsehoods has skewered and skewed the indoctrinated brains.

Jesus gave the presence of his peace to the world by his life, not through his death; the clergy has it all backward by claiming Jesus gave the world life through his death, uh uh. Couldn’t be farther from the truth. Blood sacrifice is a most ridiculous doctrine was a lie from beginning to end and yet born again Christians have swallowed.

What a joke. In the own words of the author: The truth is, we know next to nothing about Barabbas. Scripture gives us very few details about him other than his name and a list of the crimes he was charged with……he comes on the pages of Scripture with no introduction, and then he disappears without any trace and is never mentioned again.

So where is the clear illustration? Where is the story? There is no story. There is only work of fiction for a sermon to pass time to a bored congregation that has no meaning but to satisfy an editor who practices embellishment

Reel in that line because there are no fish taking the bait; well, except Naz.

…..”Jesus Christ will separate the true Scotsman from the false, not me…..” But Paul you already have (defined; i.e. separated) the separation simply by making the statement “real born again Christian”. You define it, you separate it, by the qualifier “real” which implies there are the false born again Christian, and you know the relevance to make the judgment/ separation.

Jesus Christ said one of you will betray me. This was true and do you know how Jesus knew who was to betray him? He would not flee if the plan proved effective and he would not die but for the sake of strategic appearance the metaphorical would be life his death in the tomb and the resurrection after healing had been established.

And so, by the time the betrayal was at hand, the tomb had been hewn, the plan for survival, escape, medication and healing in place, including the plan to have an audience with Pilate for the body before the custom of breaking the legs of the crucified was fulfilled as a last act to ensure death. The centurion probing of his side with the spear thrust would prove by “no flinching reaction” the absence of conscious life.

Jesus knew the final day, the time, the place, where the betrayal and arrest would take place which was finalized at a meeting with Jesus at what is called the Transfiguration. AND the reason he did not flee is told by Jesus himself when the moment approached and the sudden fear encompassed his mind. Because Jesus was well aware that if the planning was not perfect implemented, he could be in real danger of actual death and he was fearful of that outcome; nevertheless, he put his faith in the hands of his secret disciples to carry out the covert operation.

AND THEN concluded with the words: “Father, if you are willing, remove this cup from me. Nevertheless, not my will, but yours, be done.” And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly; and his sweat became like great drops of blood falling down to the ground.”

What shall I say Father, save me from this hour? But for this cause came I unto this hour and he set his face like a flint, he turned neither right hand nor to the left; he allowed neither foe nor friend to deter him; he was obedient to the plan that had been devised. He surrendered and did not flee in the face of arrest, why?

because the time for fulfillment was come.

Remember in John 7:8 “You go up to the feast. I am not going up to this feast, for MY TIME HAS NOT YET FULLY COME.

At The Wedding Wine at Cana
…3 And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine. 4 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? MINE HOUR IS NOT YET COME.

Now just to refresh your memory Paul, I did ask a question and hope in reminding you of it again that you will attempt to answer it….”

Paul:
You are wrong that Jesus et al faked his death; Jesus did not fake his death; he and his friends labored to find a solution to avoid the death of a good and innocent man that the Sanhedrin viewed as a rival who could destroy their religion, their livelihood, and who had already planned to eliminate Jesus by killing him as per John 7:1.

The plan to kill a rival against their religion called for a public execution as a spectacle that would both shame and condemn the pseudo Seditionist Leader and exonerate the Clerics. Jesus became the most wanted fugitive in the country, a Decree demanded anyone knowing his whereabouts to report it.

His followers were already being hunted, persecuted and murdered and he was clearly not the unknown figure as he once was in the early days of the campaign. Even Herod was delighted when he heard Jesus was in his jurisdiction.

It is well known that conspiracists and prophets alike spend their days, weeks and months trying to link what has been written looking for the connection from biblical prophecies, Nostradamus and the like to make an event fit the peg or the mousehole they carve for themselves.

How many political world events are linked to biblical prophecies day in and day out. From the Israel Nation of 1948 to the the twin towers tragedy of 9/11. The televangelists sharpen their prophetic knives with glee at every big event of their time and there are those who claim they themselves are the result of biblical prophecy: Among many others charlatan prophet wannabees, when Rulon Jeffs died in 2002, Warren Jeffs became his successor with his official title in the FLDS Church becoming “President and Prophet, Seer and Revelator” as well as “President of the Priesthood”.

You may accept all the old testament links but I do not, other than the obvious trend predictions and the eternal hope of mankind for a champion. And there are champions in every generation that arise to confront the evils that also arise.

Phil Johnson begins his message, “So turn with me, if you will, to Matthew 27:15-26. This is the account of how Jesus Christ changed places with Barabbas. Here is a vivid and living illustration of the principle of penal substitutionary atonement. Christ literally died in Barabbas’ place, on a cross meant for Barabbas, taking the punishment Barabbas deserved – while Barabbas himself went free.” He expounds using contextual detail Barabbas’ biblical significance in the crucifixion narrative while citing numerous concise Scriptural references for further insight & comprehension. Then Johnson concludes, “He [Christ/Messiah] died in the place and in the stead of sinners like Barabbas – and like me. . . . and like you, if you are someone who confesses your sin rather than covering it up. First John 1:9: ‘If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.’

That is the gospel, perfectly illustrated in the release of Barabbas: ‘that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that He was buried, that He was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures.’ So that (in the words of Romans 10:9) ‘if you confess with your mouth that Jesus/Yahshua is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.’

Thus Barabbas epitomizes and illustrates the central principle of gospel truth. He is, in the words of J. C. Ryle:

. . . a lively illustration of the great Christian doctrine of substitution. Barabbas, the real criminal, is acquitted and let go free. Jesus, innocent and guiltless, is condemned and sentenced to death. So is it in the salvation of our souls. We are all by nature like Barabbas, and deserve God’s wrath and condemnation; yet he was accounted righteous, and set free. The Lord Jesus Christ is perfectly innocent; and yet He is counted a sinner, punished as a sinner, and put to death that we may live. Christ suffers, though guiltless, that we may be pardoned. We are pardoned, though guilty, because of what Christ does for us. We are sinners, and yet counted righteous. Christ is righteous, and yet counted a sinner. Happy is that man who understands this doctrine, and has laid hold on it by faith for the salvation of his own soul.”

“There is no one holy like YHWH, indeed, there is no one besides You, nor is there any rock like our God. Boast no more so very proudly, do not let arrogance come out of your mouth; for YHWH is a God of knowledge, and with Him actions are weighed.” (1 Samuel 2:2-3)

“Do not let your heart be troubled; believe in God, believe also in Me. In My Father’s house are many dwelling places; if it were not so, I would have told you; for I go to prepare a place for you. If I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself, that where I am, there you may be also. And you know the way where I am going.” Thomas said to Him, “Lord, we do not know where You are going, how do we know the way?” Jesus/Yahshua said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me. If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; from now on you know Him, and have seen Him.” (John 14:1-7)

Moreover, “For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil. For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. But he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God.” (John 3:17-21)

“The Father loves the Son and has given all things into His hand. He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.” (John 3:35-36)

I know you can’t see it because you do not want to see the light of truth. Jesus did not die for your sins or Barabbas sins. Unless you can get the religious blood-letting nonsense of the Old Testament atonement out of your feckless head you will discover that it’s the Life of Jesus that revolutionized the human experience, you’ll remain in the dark.

When you start from the wrong premise, how can your illustration of Johnson’s rant or conclusion be accurate. That’s why the illustration you provided is as useless to me as the words and life of Jesus are as useless to you.

“These scriptures are they that testify of me and you will not come to me that you might have life.” So you’ve got a bible you study and you flatter yourself on your biblical scholarship. You derive from it your theological and philosophical propositions but you examine that book without any revelation of the one who authored it and you fail to recognize the one of whom it testifies and because you will not come to me, that in me you might have that life that only I can give you, you’ve got a dead bible and a dead religion and it won’t be long before you have a dead Christ because you see if you study the bible long enough without coming to the one of whom it speaks you’ll crucify him. You’ll take away his life and applaud his death like the fanatical life takers who practiced that disgusting ritual for centuries and do you think it will stop with you Frank? You are perpetuating the fraud Jesus came to abolish!

The warped indoctrination by which you think you’re empowered has left you twisted and impotent like a carrot gone limp after too long a time in the fridge or veggie cellar of religion where the essence of your life force like the limp carrot has been sucked away from lack of knowledge Jesus’ life to sustain you, so you glorify his crucifixion believing his death was done for you as the clergy gets out of the guilt they deserve for their plan to kill him by planting the death idea as your fault but a most wonderful part of your redemption. Can you not see the caca del toro irony of the fraud that has been visited upon the whole world?

I am happy for you that you are at peace with your convictions and appreciate your desire to share them with others, but I think you are minimizing the point I was trying to make. Setting aside the question of whether or not Jesus actually said the things John says he did, I understand that the teachings of John and the letters of Paul are the very core of Christian dogma. We are however, all of us, products of our culture, education and upbringing. I cannot see how the beliefs of someone born and raised in Missouri are any more valid than those of someone raised in Tibet, India, Saudi Arabia or Iran. There is no basis, as far as I can tell, to justify the God concepts of one culture to be more valid than those of another, other than that is what one chooses to believe.

I find it unfortunate that when Jerome assembled the Vulgate Bible and Zayd compiled the Quran they chose not to include scriptures that specifically advocated a tolerance for the religious beliefs of other cultures, assuming such writings even existed in early Christian writings. It is my understanding that Mohammed advised tolerance for Christians and Jews, a tolerance which unfortunately is no longer shared by modern day Shia and Wahhabi Sunni Muslims. Also, I have no idea what Mohammed thought of the beliefs of Hindus, which are often erroneously interpreted as polytheistic, or the godless beliefs of Buddhists, nor am I aware of any comparable New Testament scriptures that advocate tolerance of alternative beliefs. Maybe I am simply ignorant of such writings, but it seems to me that Christian scripture is oriented more to the “my God is the one true God” side of the argument, possibly the result of a disgust with the polytheism of the Romans.

You can thus appreciate my own disgust when religious authors, Christian or otherwise, tout their “one true God” dogma. In my mind, it is that lack of tolerance for the equally valid religious beliefs of others that is responsible for the mass executions that victorious armies of one culture have inflicted on the defeated population of another for the past 2500 years in the name of religious purity. You can find undertones of my God is the one true God and yours is a lie from when the Persians attacked the Greeks in 499BC, right up to today’s slaughters in the Middle East and elsewhere. Religions are supposed to be about moral codes and the peace that can be obtained when those codes are adhered to rather than justifications for the slaughter of those who believe differently.

“…….people …. coming to the conclusion that God is the best explanation for the world…..” has to be one of the most ill conceived phrases ever!

Nobody on this earth today has ever come to the conclusion that God is the best explanation for anything; the notion of the “gods” is one that has its root in ancient man-made religious dogma when man exploited the ignorance of the uneducated to satisfy his own ego and pleasures through magic that demonstrated the power of his god, called miracles and if magic didn’t work brute force did.

Before the discovery of fire-control that kept humans living in the cave and the mountain-top rockface for protection from the animals ready to devour them, it was not unusual to have relative harmony in a village society facing a common foe. But after the advent of fire, man came out of the cave and ego ran amuck. It was dog eat dog as religion took hold of the imagination and religious dogma started being rammed down the throats of the gullible for indoctrination of the supernatural that has lasted down through the ages and influences everybody on earth until this very day. So please don’t imagine that you or anyone else had the freedom of free will to come to any conclusion about the explanation of the world.

Religion began gorging itself on the human spirit by stifling it to conform to the strong man’s ego when fire became the spirit signature of the ego man’s God. The indoctrination after ten thousand centuries has remained a force in the world ever since, for everybody ever born. So in saying that people came to the conclusion that God is the best explanation of the world is an exercise in fantasy that has erroneously lulled us into the semi sleep of a dulled mind. The best anybody can hope for, wish for, desire and pray for, is the strength of will to unburden ourselves from the shackles of ancient men who knew less then, than an elementary school child does now; and if you think you have free will, well don’t think about “free will”, but try reaching a conclusion about the world with knowledge and set your “will, free” to do that; then, you’ll be giving your mind a reboot.

Don’t apologize for being a Christian, and I am not laughing at you, it’s too serious, to laugh about; we all have been led astray by the same influence, it is pervasive. Jesus tried to show us the tyranny of that tradition 2000 years ago and I believe he is telling us the same thing again today as I repeat today what he has told us before in his indictment against religious influence which you either did not read without cleric ill conceived interpretation skewing your mind, skimmed over in haste or did not understand the importance of; and his words are well documented; first in John 7:1 (why he went into hiding) & John 7:7 ( religious hatred); and, Luke 11:52 (the key, scholars have hidden from the “people”!). This is clearly outlined in the Gospel of Matthew who devoted one whole chapter about this very matter and that is in the world still: Chptr 23….Jesus speaking……. to you and to me, et al. Read it again.

You may sincerely believe, and countless members of Christianity do, that Matthew Chapter 23 only applies to the Scribes and the Pharisees two centuries ago in Jesus day but I think you’d be sincerely wrong. Matthew 23 is as applicable today as it was then, as it will continue to be applicable in every generation until the “flour is leavened by the yeast of Heaven” throughout the whole world.

My aim is to provide the tools of knowledge to help make decisions more clearly, using self-perception, to become re-energized by the Jesus perspective and help you dismiss listening to the pseudo Religious Scholars, to whom Jesus said: “Woe to you Lawyers, Scholars, Religious Leaders for you have hidden and taken away the KEY to knowledge, not entering yourselves and hindering those who would.

THINK SINK; or else, ENTER by your own wit. “How can you do what’s right when you seek the approval of others?”
NASB: “for they loved the approval of men rather than the approval of God.” (within) Jn 12:43

Seeking approval from others is a deep need for many. From the time we are children, we are constantly looking up to our parents, elders, teachers, role models and friends to be accepted and in alignment with others and the world around us. As a result, it creates an internal belief system that we must take on other’s opinions and feelings about ourselves rather than formulate, learn about and listen to our own inner guidance system.

AND it is this guidance system within us that Jesus came out and used against the supernatural religion and the clergy who practiced and forced, on pain of death, everybody else to follow. The intolerance of religious insanity of a One True God is too bizarre and it should be easier for you to see that now that the whole world had shrunk by technology that we can see the diversity within humanity.

This has been the mindset of people for thousands of years especially when fire became the weapon of choice for the “Chosen People”.

S.S.S.S.A.S.
Transition from Cave open village,
Advent of fire consolidates religion but sparks world hatred for the Jewish people that has lasted until present day.

Part 2:
After the discovery of fire-control, men migrated out of the caves and rockfaces and with this new found weapon set out to extinguish the creatures that would eat them and their children if they strayed too far from the cavern haven. At that time the discoverers also took advantage of his fellow man. By being the first to discover fire-control not only could the animals be subdued into submission by the fire controllers but outside groups of other human societies were also subdued by surrender and submission; for there was no weapon available to them, to defeat the strength of strong man setting enemy villages afire.

The fire bearing conquerors carried their fire torches everywhere they traveled for they were certain that God appointed them as the chosen people by sending them his love in the power of fire, with which to control pagan worlds worshiping the false gods of stones and idols of wood carvers of mythological proportions. Let them learn the Laws of God or be destroyed by fire was the chant of religious fervor. And this war chant was not untypical for the Religious Society to justify military conquests as a righteous missionary crusade to promote one’s Law and Righteousness of the one and only, true God.

Indeed fire was the wrath of God placed in the hands that formed the basis of the claim of his “Chosen People”, fire did that and that allowed the Chosen People’s conquering armies to defeat the enemy. Soon altars to their God were built and priests appointed to honor god by stoking the spirit of god, “fire, that it go not out by day or by night.” Rabbi Meir of Rothenburg (13th-century Germany) points out that the flame was so important to the Jewish people that it even burned throughout their wanderings in the wilderness, and to protect it they would cover the flame with a large pot while on their journey. He continues, “It has been the Jewish way throughout the centuries and in all places to create vessels which would preserve the holy fire of Judaism.”

The three foundational components of Judaism were constructed to be mobile-capable and made-ready for travel at a moment’s notice: The Ark of the Covenant, The Altar of Fire and The Tabernacle which was the Sanctuary, the Safe House for the Covenant and the Altar.

Consider Deut: 13:12-17
Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you, that some worthless men among you, have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods. In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully. If you find it is true and can prove that such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock. Then you must pile all the plunder in the middle of the street and burn it. Put the entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the LORD your God. It shall be a heap forever; it shall not be built again. So none of the accursed things shall remain in your hand, that the LORD may turn from the fierceness of His anger and show you mercy………..”

Whew, kinda makes you sweat to realize the nastiness of the Gods that Man created in his image, doesn’t it?

Gam is short for Gamaliel. Because of his caution in Acts, I got the impression he is not opposed to this new movement and may even be sympathetic if not a secret follower like Joe and Nic. I find the Apostle Paul’s connection with Gamaliel also very interesting.

My point regarding the plan to “avoid the death of a good an innocent man” is very simple. A good plan wouldn’t have involved the Romans and you certainly wouldn’t be running around telling everybody I’ll physically rise from the dead according to the sign of Jonah. If you are correct, the plan appears to me trying to fulfill Old Testament prophecies regarding the Messiah/Suffering Messiah and giving the appearance He overcame death. For me this plan smells like a scam, that is why I used the term “fake His death”.

I’ve always looked at the Old Testament through the lens of the New Testament, but some things are still hard to comprehend. However, looking to the evil of mankind helped me. From the age old stories to a you tube video of a Muslim child shooting an infidel in the back of the head as a proud adult helps, may be we don’t know what things were like back then.

I find it unfortunate that you are closed off from imagining the event as your biases clearly show you are actively resisting the possibility, by using all the stereotypical phrases: “smells like a scam”…”…. that is why I used the term “fake His death…….”.

It is worth noting that the Gospels only mention the two Sanhedrin Council Members Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus as being the secret disciples of Jesus, present throughout Jesus’ campaign and most notably at the end of the campaign when they were the only two present who claimed the body, carried out the tomb burial ritual and sealed the tomb with the huge wheel-like stone.

the Jews asked Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away. 32 Then the soldiers came and broke the legs of the first and of the other who was crucified with Him. 33 But when they came to Jesus and saw that He was already dead, they did not break His legs. 34 But one of the soldiers pierced His side with a spear, and immediately blood and water came out. 35 And he who has seen has testified, and his testimony is true; and he knows that he is telling the truth, so that you may believe.

36 For these things were done that the Scripture should be fulfilled, “Not one of His bones shall be broken.” (Who made that claim of “fulfilling scripture”, not Jesus)

37 And again another Scripture says, “They shall look on Him whom they pierced.” (Who made that claim?) Well, search the scriptures and you’ll find lots of other things to claim also, that’s the nature of conspiracists who work in hindsight with 20/20 vision. LOL))

38 After this, Joseph of Arimathea, being a disciple of Jesus, but secretly, for fear of the Jews, asked Pilate that he might take away the body of Jesus; and Pilate gave him permission.

So he came and took the body of Jesus. 39 And Nicodemus, who at first came to Jesus by night, also came, bringing a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about a hundred pounds. 40 Then they took the body of Jesus, and bound it in strips of linen with the spices, as the custom of the Jews is to bury.

41 Now in the place where He was crucified there was a garden, and in the garden a new tomb in which no one had yet been laid. 42 So there they laid Jesus, because of the Jews’ Preparation Day, for the tomb was nearby.

Only Joseph and Nicodemus were the pallbearers of Jesus and note also that: “Now in the place where He was crucified there was a garden, and in the garden a new tomb in which no one had yet been laid.”

That new tomb was the personal tomb that Joseph himself had hewn out of the rockface over a two year period in preparation for this very day because the crucifixion had already been in the planning stages years before the event came to pass and being members of the Sanhedrin and Rulers of the Jews were in on all the plans and kept Jesus apprised of everything that was happening behind his back. It no small wonder then, how Jesus knew who was the person going to betray him and by extrapolation who the two men were who appeared with Jesus at the so called Transfiguration when Jesus learned of the imminent arrest schedule that very night: Lk 9:30 And behold, two men talked with Him, who were Moses and Elijah, 31 who appeared in glory and spoke of His decease which He was about to accomplish at Jerusalem.

I see this planning as a loving relationship between these men and Jesus that determined to thwart the potential death of an innocent man and they had, not only the zeal to endure, but the wealth and power and positions of influence to carry it out by stealth I hasten to point out; not scam, the construction of the tomb that consisted of an escape tunnel.

One would only resist this feasible explanation to uphold a long held notion of dogma to support religious supernaturalism that appeals to the our emotion but not to our common sense logic.

As to Gamiliel and Paul. We know that Paul was a Pharisee schooled in all the ways of the Law as was Gamiliel so I would postulate that they may have been school mates and/or worked on cases together when the apostles were being rounded up, harassed and murdered with Paul’s consent.

As to the sign of Jonah: You don’t suppose that Jonah was dead do you? Remember, the numbers 3 days and 3 nights or 3 years or 3 ½ years (preaching, struggling, building, 40 days and nights(rain, fasting etc.), years. These are all allegories and are composed of several symbols or metaphors.

Jonah was thrown into the sea but survived the ordeal and for a period of time that may or mjust as Jesus would not die but rise again, alive! Jonah described his ordeal as a monster of a storm, like being in the belly of a huge fish; or, as he struggled Jonah 2:2 “out of the belly of sheol I cried”…. where Hades is both the underworld of the dead and the personification of the evil it represents. Your guess is as good as mine but don’t be weighed down about that, being inside the belly of a whale nonsense, in a literal sense.

And he carries on in that same chapter telling the harrowing story of survival:

“Your billows and Your waves passed over me.”…… “The waters surrounded me, even to my soul;
The deep closed around me;
Weeds were wrapped around my head.
6 I went down to the moorings of the mountains;
The earth with its bars closed behind me forever;
Yet You have brought up my life from the pit,……”

Now we don’t know if this was the sign Jesus was talking about or if it was the sign that Jonah gave to the Ninevites when he warned them thusly:

“Now Nineveh was an exceedingly great city, a three-day journey in extent. 4 And Jonah began to enter the city on the first day’s walk. ( A three day journey but Jonah reached it in one day…was he jogging or running or on his ass?) Nevertheless “Then he cried out and said, “Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown!”

So what did the people do? They heeded the warning!

“And He (the King) caused it to be proclaimed and published throughout Nineveh by the decree of the king and his nobles, saying,
Let neither man nor beast, herd nor flock, taste anything; do not let them eat, or drink water. 8 But let man and beast be covered with sackcloth, and cry mightily to God; yes, let every one turn from his evil way and from the violence that is in his hands. 9 Who can tell if God will turn and relent, and turn away from His fierce anger, so that we may not perish?
10 Then God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God relented from the disaster that He had said He would bring upon them, and He did not do it.”
So you and I can only speculate which sign Jesus was speaking about when he said the only sign given. But in fact Jesus could have been referring to both signs. 1./ That Jonah did not die in the sea but rose again after the period of time referred to as 3 days and 3 nights in the fear of the underworld and 2./ gave his message for repentance, eventually in like manner, to the Ninevites.

It does not trouble me in the least with not knowing every detail because there are always several scenarios because it is indeed like you said, we don’t know what things were like back then, compared to the atrocities we see in the world today!

The first four lines in paragraph 15 should read something like the following as I inadvertently deleted the original gist of the thought but didn’t catch it before I uploaded:

Jonah was thrown into the sea but survived the ordeal and for a period of time that may or may not have been 3 days and 3 nights but a short period of time(shorter than 40 days and 40 nights certainly) and just as Jesus did not die from his struggle, neither did Jonah die from his ordeal but rose again from the struggle, rose again, alive! Not dead but in his original physical body still scarred by the wounds(I imagine Jonah had a few cuts and scrapes and bruises too) which he showed to the doubters and ate food with them as well. But Jesus then, likened to the sign of Jonah, arose from the belly of Sheol.

Wasn’t the Apostle Paul a student of Gamaliel? That’s how I interpret Acts 22: 3 (ie. “educated under Gamaliel”). Is this the same Gamaliel in Acts 5: 34? Here Gamaliel’s words appear clear to me, at a minimum not hostile at best another secret supporter.

I guess will have to agree to disagree that the sign of Jonah is about the Resurrection. Do you agree a Resurrection from the dead was even prophesied? “Sir, we remember that when He was still alive that the deceiver said, “After three days I am to rise again.” Matthew 27: 63

Taking the supernatural out of the Resurrection story and it appears to be a scam to me, obviously you disagree. A scam is a deliberate deception in my mind. Your Mary do not touch me because I am not healed, is my do not cling to me. If you are correct it was a scam because He did not tell Mary He was hurt and that is why she could not touch Him.

“………at a minimum not hostile at best another secret supporter……..” Paul never met Jesus and it’s unlikely Gamiliel did either. Neither he nor Paul ever figured in the life of Jesus life…..IMHO. And if Paul was brought up at the feet of Gamiliel so be it..maybe he was but it has no bearing on what I am putting forth.

The sign of Jonah can mean the re-emerging of Jesus when everybody thought he was dead, so what?

Paul I am convinced that you have no idea what Jesus said to Mary and more importantly why he said anything he said. All you have is what somebody believed took place, what may have been said. So you have nothing to support your notion of what was actually said, implied or inferred. It is obvious to me there are only two ways to understand what took place, either he was healing and denied the touching for that reason which is the lessor of the two scenarios, or he refused the clinging to avoid being observed by the enemy and maybe even a little of both. Now think of this. When Jesus was in the desert for 40 days and 40 nights fasting, who was there to record the conversation between Jesus and the devil, anybody? So how do we know what happened there other than conjecture? I rest my case.

If it is true that you believe a scam is a deliberate deception, that is a most likely definition I agree with but that has nothing to do with Jesus because the supernatural is impossible, never has happened throughout all of mankind history, none, not one, nada, niet….and never will.

Now of course if you can prove what thousands before you, over thousands of centuries have been unable to prove, fill your boots. Let me know when you have the proof to replicate or duplicate or otherwise facilitate the source that the supernatural even exists. I challenge you to offer any proof.

If you cannot and I don’t expect that you ever will, then listen to what I am telling you, what Jesus has been telling you and dismiss the cleric stupidity and deceit for which Jesus himself has already condemned the sources you rely on to egg you on in the abyss but can’t let go of.

Preach the supernatural and all you do is support the idea that the hole in the bottom of the bucket actually is something that exists.

Send me a telepathic thought, make the chicken bone I am discarding stand upright and maybe do the chicken dance, turn the tomato juice I am drinking into apple juice, anything….prove your assertions that the supernatural is part of the story; but Paul, we both know you can’t and because you are not stupid, you’re just pretending to be religious. And neither could thousands of psychics and wannabee prophets and preachers since the days of the mythological gods created from the imaginations of men. Never happened and never will happen. Just more magic tricks to awe the awedience.

Get it? to awe the awedience? The ready-flock to sit and pretend they are hypnotized for the show and bark like dogs or cluck like chickens, all part of the dupery the world has swallowed.

Some things in the bible are quite remarkable in their simplicity while others are remarkable in their absence of common sense. Some we can postulate as embellishment, omission, errancy and others as fictitious, fabrications, misinterpretation or misunderstanding and yet others as idioms, metaphors, sayings, adage, dialect or jargon of a group of people, either in a certain region or a group with common interests.

In my early teen days days I grew up in a small rural village that had no paved roads and only one main road going through, everybody lived on the sides of this single road. When a driver(especially one in particular who was a speed freak) passed by, going really fast, we would marvel at the huge dust cloud in his wake; he made the biggest, our expression was that he disappeared in a cloud (of dust).

Drag boat racing shoots up an awesome wall of water behind it we call the Rooster Tail. If we went back in time and told 1st century people using modern terminology that the boats disappear in a rooster tail they may very well look at you incredulously as they imagined a literal interpretation.

In the same way that I mentioned cars disappearing in a cloud up over the hill’s horizon could easily be the same way early Christians used for describing the dust cloud kicked up by a fast moving train of horses and wagon wheels that took Jesus(and entourage) from their sight up and over the horizon. That scenario is not unreasonable from my perspective having grown up where a dry powdery roadway dust was a common occurrence forcing the use of the idiom of the day: He “left in a cloud” or he “disappeared in a cloud”: As kids riding our bicycles we use to ask our village playmates if we made a big cloud driving fast or when we braked, dragging the rear wheel in the loose gravel. lol

Idiom: “a group of words whose meaning considered as a unit is different from the meanings of each word considered separately.”

For example:
…..while they watched………….”….a cloud received Him out of their sight.” KJV
“before their very eyes….”..a cloud hid him from their sight.” NIV
“….a cloud received Him out of their sight.” NASB
“….he was taken up and disappeared in a cloud.” MSG
“…..till a cloud hid him from their sight.” PHILLIPS
“he rose into the sky(over a hill horizon)and disappeared into a cloud.” TLB
“….a cloud took him away from their eyes.” MOUNCE
“A cloud hid him so that they could no longer see him. NOG
“A cloud carried Him away so they could not see Him.” NLV
“….he was taken up into a cloud while they were watching, and they could no longer see him.” NLT
“….and an anan (cloud) took him away from their eyes.” OJB
“…and a cloud took him out of their sight.” RSVCE
“…He began to rise from the ground(going up a hill) before their eyes until the clouds obscured Him from their vision.” VOICE
“They watched him going. Then a cloud hid him, and they did not see him any more.” (NT) (WE)
“..he was taken up, and a cloud did receive him up from their sight;” YLT

Consider the metaphor:
Jonah was three days and three nights in
the stomach of a big fish.
belly of a whale
belly of the sea monster
belly of sheol.

The Son of Man will be three days and three nights
in the grave,
in the heart of the earth,
in the bowels of the earth,
in the tomb
descended into hell
depths of sheol

Alive but “IN THE PLACE” where the dead lay; today’s jargon we might say funeral parlor, cemetery, morgue, or crematorium

Lazarus was alive and entombed alive, buried alive as if he were dead because of his abnormal medical condition and so he came out when the seal was removed, alive, raised from the (place of the) dead.

Now as to the earthquake and the tombs opened and those who slept?

Matt 27: And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his ghost.
At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The earth shook, the rocks split and the tombs broke open. The bodies of many holy people who had died were raised to life. at that moment: AND THEN IN THE NEXT SENTENCE WHICH IS STRANGE BECAUSE THE DEAD RAISED TO LIFE AT THE TIME THAT JESUS CRIED IN A LOUD VOICE, YET WAITED DAYS UNTIL “They came out of the tombs AFTER Jesus’ resurrection” and went into the holy city and appeared to many people. (NIV)

Is there some metaphorical comparison somewhere in this account we can’t see, perhaps, perhaps not?

I found an interesting discourse on this very topic, asking questions not unlike my own. You should find the author’s reasoning penetrating.

“What Happened to the Resurrected Saints?
Two short verses in Matthew raise perhaps the most serious questions that can be put to a literal interpretation of the resurrection stories. Matthew said that at the moment of Jesus’ death “the tombs were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; and coming out of the tombs after his resurrection they entered into the holy city and appeared unto many” (Matthew 27:52-53). This is an account of a miracle unsurpassed anywhere else in the gospels. It makes the post resurrection appearing of Jesus “to above five hundred brethren at once” (1 Cor. 15:6) appear tame in comparison.

In this case, many saints were raised and appeared to many. Unlike the accounts of Jesus raising Lazarus or the synagogue ruler’s daughter or Jesus himself being raised, this depicts saints dead for way over “three days” being raised. And, from the phrase, “they entered the holy city and appeared to many,” it is possible to infer that these many raised saints showed themselves to many who were not believers! Yet Josephus, who wrote a history of Jerusalem both prior to and after her fall, i.e., forty years after the death of Jesus, knew of Jesus but nothing of this raising of many and appearing to many. Of this greatest of all miracles, not a rumor appears in the works of Josephus or of any other ancient author. Surely at least one of the many raised out of those many emptied tombs was still alive just prior to Josephus’s time, amazing many. Or at least many who had seen those many saints were still repeating the tale. Although people may have doubted that Jesus raised a few people while he was still alive and although “some doubted” Jesus’ own resurrection (Matt. 28:17), who could fail to have been impressed by many risen saints appearing to many? How also could Peter have neglected to mention them in his Jerusalem speech a mere fifty days after they “appeared to many in the holy city”? Surely their appearance must have been foremost on everyone’s mind. So why didn’t Paul mention such a thing in his letters, our earliest sources? Why did the women who visited the “empty tomb” on Sunday morning not take notice that many other tombs were likewise open? Why didn’t the visitors to Jesus’ tomb mention that they had met or seen many raised saints in that vicinity, meeting them on the way to Jesus’ tomb or on the way back to town? Why did the apostles disbelieve the first reports of Jesus’ resurrection when a mass exit from the tombs had accompanied his resurrection? Why didn’t Matthew know how many raised saints there were? Why couldn’t he name a single one or a single person to whom they had appeared? How did Matthew know that these saints had come out of their tombs? That would be more than anyone had seen in the case of Jesus’ resurrection.

Let’s look at the implications of some of these questions. According to the literal Greek in Matthew 27:50-53, the tombs were opened and the saints were “raised” at the instant of Jesus’ death, but they entered the city over a day later! Apparently, neither Joseph of Arimathea nor Nicodemus, while burying Jesus (John. 19:38-40), chanced to marvel at all the opened graves and the raised saints in them waiting patiently for Sunday morning. The women in Matthew’s account were likewise oblivious to the many graves lying opened by the earthquake and the saints supposedly just beginning to leave the cemetery for town the same morning the women were arriving. And the other gospels were silent on this major miracle involving many! Paul was silent on this matter in 1 Corinthians 15, where he discussed the resurrection at great length! Peter was silent on the matter in his speech recorded in Acts 2, delivered a mere 50 days after the many saints entered the city and appeared to many! Surely the “gift of tongues” would pale in miraculous significance compared to the “raising of the many who appeared to many.” Yet Peter said nothing about the latter. We are not talking about just the apostles, like Peter, being witnesses to just the resurrection of Jesus; we are talking about many people who had witnessed many saints being raised, and some of these “many” witnesses were surely present in the audience Peter preached to that morning. So why would he have had to speak at length to convince them that the resurrection of one man had happened? Having witnessed the resurrection of many, they would have readily accepted the claim that one man had been resurrected.

And what about the raised saints themselves? Wouldn’t they have made terrific evangelists? But we don’t read anything about that; instead, we have silence. We admit that to argue from silence is not equivalent to disproof; however, it is not the silence of extrabiblical sources that makes us doubt this account of multiple resurrections. It is the silence of other biblical authors that is generating our doubt.

A few extrabiblical sources did expand Matthew’s tale of the many raised saints. These expansions were composed over one hundred years after Matthew’s gospel was written. Remarkably, they even mentioned the names of some of the “many saints” raised, like Simeon and his sons, Adam and Eve, the patriarchs and prophets, etc., names that Matthew neglected to include. Of course, these expansions of the two extraordinary verses in Matthew and the list of names are found only in apocryphal gospels, which are full of all sorts of marvelous miracles that even surpass the ones attributed to Jesus in the four gospels that the church now endorses (like the story of the talking cross that followed Jesus out of his tomb in the Gospel of Peter).

Perhaps Matthew, like the authors of the apocryphal gospels, collected tales he had heard from other believers and/or composed gospel fictions. Perhaps when he composed those two short verses, he was only giving mythical form to the belief that “the resuscitation of the righteous was assigned to the first appearance of the Messiah, in accordance with the Jewish ideas” (D. F. Strauss, The Life of Jesus Critically Examined). He was also indulging in miracle enhancement: multiplying signs and wonders said to accompany Jesus’ death and resurrection, i.e., Matthew’s unique account of two earthquakes, one that opened the tombs of the many saints (at Jesus’ death) and one that moved the stone to open Jesus’ tomb (Easter morning). The other gospel writers remarkably neglected to mention that even one earthquake took place. That leaves Matthew’s account on doubly shaky ground. Neither did Matthew use the most precise words to depict this wonder, because the verses state, literally, that the saints were raised at the time of Jesus’ death and then lay around in their tombs for a day and a half before entering the city! That absurdity arises from what appears to be a sloppy interpolation of the phrase “after his resurrection”:

And Jesus cried again with a loud voice, and yielded up his spirit. And behold, the veil of the temple was rent in two from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake; and the rocks were rent; and the tombs were opened; and many bodies of the saints that had fallen asleep were raised: and coming forth out of the tombs after his resurrection they entered into the holy city and appeared unto many (Matthew 27:50-53).

The verses make more sense without that phrase than with it. Without it, they would simply state that the raised saints immediately entered the city upon Jesus’ death. But some Christian copyist, or perhaps the gospel’s chief editor, felt obligated to add the phrase “after his resurrection” to ensure the priority of Jesus’ resurrection, regardless of the literal consequences.

People who believe that many tombs were opened and that many saints appeared to many will of course have little trouble also believing that Jesus was resurrected. However, those of us who doubt the story of the many raised saints see in it a reflection of the kind of blind faith that made the story of Jesus’ resurrection catch on in the first place.”

The difference between faith and superstition is that the first uses reason to go as far as it can, and then makes the jump; the second shuns reason entirely — which is why superstition is not the ally, but the enemy, of true religion.
“Purely Personal Prejudices” Sidney J. Harris

“Remember the day you stood before the LORD/YHWH your God at Horeb, when YHWH said to me, ‘Assemble the people to Me, that I may let them hear My words so they may learn to reverence Me all the days they live on the earth, and that they may teach their children.’ (Deuteronomy 4:10)

From where I stand the key consideration to be taken into account remains one’s worldview. Keep in mind that this develops as it incorporates new data & experiences into its model. For this reason I see the question of how or whether we conceptualize God being most intricate & complex. What it is that we use as the basis for this conceptualization proves all the difference for the direction our lives takes. Additionally, what precautions do we advance to secure the integrity and stability of the convictions we hold? How do we avoid building a house of cards on the sands of ignorance & political correctness? In this age of deception it is indeed a search for Truth. If you claim you have no basis for Truth other than blind faith then you’re at a decided disadvantage which results in aimless drifting akin to attempting navigation using a compass deprived of true north. Where do you place your trust? Who or what fortifies your instruction? What determines your priorities? Do you place your faith here, for example?: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_Seminar

Concerning “tolerance” Christ/Messiah teaches this: “You have heard that it was said, ‘YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? If you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same? Therefore you are to be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.” (Matthew 5:43-48) In considering all things: “Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment.” (John 7:24)

“They stood before the council” and because of what Peter said “they were cut to the quick and were intending to slay them.” It doesn’t say who else was there but weren’t Joe and Nic part of the council? If so, why didn’t they say something? So is it logical to conclude Gamaliel’s defence saved them?

So you don’t agree because of this defence (Acts 5: 34-39) it’s logical to conclude Gamaliel is not hostile to Jesus Christ’s movement and may even be another secret supporter, I’m okay with that.

It seems very logical to me Gamaliel would’ve been aware about the plan to send people to Damascus. You don’t think it’s logical based on his defence at the council Gamaliel talked to Saul/the Apostle Paul before he headed to Damascus?

What I find most interesting is your perceived hostility that I consider Gamaliel a compatriot of Joe and Nic. If your plan is correct what does it matter that Gamaliel was also a supporter?

In your plan Jesus Christ didn’t say don’t touch me because I’m hurt, therefore by definition it is a deception. You can rationalize it as a deception for a greater good but it is still a deception. If you are correct, the fruits of that deception are pure evil.

Paul never knew Jesus so why would you suppose that Gamiliel did and in any case why is he not mentioned anywhere except in Acts which lasted over a period of time….Gamiliel could have become a member of the council months/years after Jesus trial and crucifixion.

How long after the crucifixion was Stephen stoned? after the crucifixion Paul was persecuting the followers of Jesus so how long did that last? Some say the crucifixion was in 31CE and the stoning of Stephen and trial of Paul was about 34 – 35 resp. Some put it a decade after…..Gamilieil is not mention in the Gospels and therefore has nothing to do with Jesus, he is of no significance regardless how you want him to be.

So you can call Jesus a scam artist as you wish but that is your perception, clearly contrary to scripture itself and the message of Jesus and the facts surrounding the crucifixion the entombment, the escape, the healing, the appearance of an “alive” Jesus, proving he did not die as anybody with common sense would attest to.

You on the other hand have to have some extraordinary sense of insight to imagine that Jesus was bodily dead, brain dead, all bodily functions had ceased, rigor mortis set in and then after 3 days he revived, walked through the stone rockface,bodily, snapped or waved of simply thought and rolled the huge stone away with kinetic energy. Now if you want to know what a description of a scam looks like and a fake resurrection looks like with the wool pulled over the eyes of otherwise sane and decent people ,THAT IS IT!

Sorry but what you are trying to sell, common sense people are not buying, only duped religious believers of supernatural events pounded into their pliable brains are buying the deception you have been lynched with, like the followers of Jim Jones the founder and leader of the Peoples Temple, infamous due to the mass murder-suicide in November 1978 of 918 of its members in Jonestown….you Paul, unfortunate to say are counted among the duped, barely saved from being counted among the dead yourself, as your perception makes you oblivious to reality. It’s a good thing Jim Jones did not catch you, otherwise today, you may not be able to call Jesus and his revival a scam of pure evil.

So sorry you feel that way about a man who tried to save you from the tyranny of falsehoods and deception of the clergy who had deceived everybody on earth to believe in the something never existed and never will exist. As far as you are concerned, from your posting about his resurfacing after the crucifixion, he is a con artist exactly like the clergy who brainwashed you with false misinformation by hiding the truth of Jesus that Jesus called the Key of Knowledge and even after he said that you still don’t get it.

Of you and your ilk, Jesus lamented: “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those sent to her! How often I have longed to gather your children together as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were unwilling. Look, your house is left to you desolate. And I tell you, you will not see Me again until you say, ‘Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord.’”, And until that day you can never see the real Jesus and and never perceive the truth about the real Jesus because clergy has hidden the truth and the key of knowledge that has prevented you from hearing what I have been trying to tell you. It doesn’t matter to me, my place is assured because I know the truth as it has been revealed to me, not by the deceivers in religion because I don’t seek the approval of anybody, I don’t need approval; other than from that within. I have the key to knowledge and I have opened that door. You are outside and the vault is closed to you. And not only to you, there are billions like you so you’ll have plenty of company, and as we all know misery loves company.

Take care I can show you no more and I am cautioned to not throw pearls to swine or holy things to dogs lest they trample their words, turn on you and try rend you to pieces.

After the accusation by you of Jesus being pure evil, I am done. I leave you to your devices and your house desolate.

Please don’t misunderstand my comments about Islamic tolerance; I do not take the view that Islam is more tolerant than Christianity. Goska makes some excellent points but the fact that her essay is published in the blog Jihadwatch should give you an indication of her orientation on the subject. There are many scholarly texts, such as Anthony Pagden’s Worlds at War, which present a more balanced view of the historical conflicts between East and West. If each side adhered to the teachings of their respective prophets, none of this would be an issue, but that is hardly the case. There is more than enough blame to go around for all sides with regard to the current state of world affairs and most of it has historical roots that go back centuries. It doesn’t take a major stretch of logic to suggest that the tension between India and Pakistan dates from the Muslim conquests of northern India from the 12th to the 16th centuries. A similar analogy can be drawn about the hatred and massacre of Muslims by Serbs in the 1990s as being based on the expansion of the Ottoman Empire into Eastern Europe and its subsequent collapse due to the rise of nationalism prior to World War I.

One can generate a very long list of other examples where religious intolerance over the past 1000 years has resulted in the beheadings and sales into slavery of one side by another, but I find it interesting that the majority of those incidents are perpetrated by the Abrahamic religions upon one another. Jews, Muslims and Christians may all be descendants of Abraham but they often don’t act like it. And while it is generally Jews and Christians against the Muslims, one would be foolish to ignore the rising anti-Semitism that is now occurring in the major cities of Western Europe. Equally foolish are those who believe it is their duty to convert the rest of the world to their religious beliefs on the basis that their version of God is the one true God. It just isn’t going to happen.

It was the words of Jesus himself (Matthew 22:21) that formed the basis of the separation of church and state in Western culture and the advances we have achieved in science, technology and medicine because of that have been a tremendous boon to our standard of living. For the most part, no such separation exists in Islamic cultures (with the possible exception of Turkey and no one can be sure how much longer that will last). Government and religion in Islam are so deeply interwoven that they are virtually one in the same. Anyone who thinks that they can encourage the formation of Jeffersonian democracies in Islamic cultures is grossly naïve, if not downright foolish (or even stupid?). You can’t separate church and state in Islam, making it highly unlikely that Muslims can be converted wholesale to Christian based democracies and vice versa. It is equally naïve to tout the rise of “moderate” leaders in countries such as Iran where the theocracy maintains it hold on power, just as Mohammed said it should.

And if things weren’t complicated enough, ISIS was originally funded by rich (Wahhabi?) Arabs from Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and Qatar in order to counter the influence of Shia Persian Iran in Syria and Iraq. After spending trillions of US taxpayer dollars, financed by the sale of US government securities to countries such as China, in order to fight wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, there are now calls to mobilize Christian NATO countries to destroy the Sunni ISIS extremists. Does anyone really think that will be successful in the long term? And can we really expect that Turkey, with its precarious secular government and largely Muslim population, will be a willing and active participant in such an undertaking?

There are no easy answers to any of this, a point Pagden makes at the end of his book. Much to my disappointment, I invested nearly two weeks of my free time to reading his 600 pages about the conflicts between East and West only to be told there are no easy solutions. Surprise, surprise. I suspect, however, that “my God is the one true God” is not even close to being a potential answer to East-West religious inspired conflicts.

You wrote in your last post, “If each side adhered to the teachings of their respective prophets, none of this [i.e.,historical conflicts between East and West] would be an issue, but that is hardly the case.” Some effectively argue that indeed because certain religious adherents, Islamists in particular, do in fact follow the precepts laid down by their prophet a wide path of murder, mayhem & destruction has been cut by the sword through the centuries.
Case in point:

You also seemed to recommend Anthony Pagden’s Worlds at War as a scholarly text which presents “a more balanced view of the historical conflicts between East and West”. But in your conclusion you wrote, “Much to my disappointment, I invested nearly two weeks of my free time to reading his 600 pages about the conflicts between East and West only to be told there are no easy solutions.” If that constitutes the bulk of what he left you with I can see why you feel disappointed, even cheated. What I’d expect is to gain a firm understanding of the opponents at odds and the stakes involved that will result in resolution of the conflict. Surely it pays to consider that it’s most improbable that any one book could bring such treasures to the table. Unless it was able to hammer at the genuine source of core disagreement amongst all interested parties.

God told Abraham that He would make the number of his descendants vast beyond measure [Genesis 13:16] but the blessings of His promise [Genesis 3:15] would come through Abraham’s son Isaac [Genesis 17:19]. Herein lies the crux of the ancient animus between Abraham’s sons Ishmael [Genesis 16:11-12, 17:20] and Isaac which continues to this very day. There’s an excellent book which unravels this matter incisively. It’s available in paperback entitled Islam Prophesied in Genesis by Victor Mordecai. It manifests the root of the problem and its current dilemma. Its insights are detailed crisply in about 200 pages.

One point I’d make in regard to your comment on Matthew 22:21. It should be taken in context with the previous verse: And He said to them, “Whose likeness and inscription is this?” For in His remarks to the Pharisees’ disciples and Herodians Christ/Messiah was emphasizing the fact that just as the coin minted by Rome bears the likeness and inscription of Caesar so it belongs to Caesar we bear the image and likeness of our Creator God so we belong to Him.

I too know it’s fruitless to think one person will convert another to belief in God by any means because I know this: by grace of the Almighty you have been saved through faith; and that salvation not of yourselves; it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast [Ephesians 2:8-9; Romans 4:16-17].

I have also read several of Karen Armstrong’s books. They do an excellent job of explaining the history of various religions and the conflicts which sometimes result between them. Mordecai’s book isn’t on Amazon or in my local library system. I’ll have the library do an interlibrary search. Thanks.

“There will be no world peace and there will always be conflict somewhere because of religion.”

Tell me why the following passages are to be discounted or otherwise interpreted to confirm that your theory is true? That World Peace will never come?

Listen to Jesus:….Matt 13:33 “He told them still another parable: “The kingdom of heaven is like yeast that a woman took and mixed into three measures of flour, until all of it was leavened.”

The bible talks about the time of the New Heaven and the New Earth…….Then I saw “a new heaven and a new earth,”a for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away……….They will be his people, and God himself will be with them and be their God. ‘He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.”

Yet that will not be for everyone because it goes on to say:

“I am making everything new!”……..I did not see a temple in the city, because the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are its temple. The city does not need the sun or the moon to shine on it, for the glory of God gives it light, and the Lamb is its lamp. The nations will walk by its light, and the kings of the earth will bring their splendor into it. On no day will its gates ever be shut, for there will be no night there. The glory and honor of the nations will be brought into it. Nothing impure will ever enter it, nor will anyone who does what is shameful or deceitful, but only those whose names are written in the Lamb’s book of life.”

Isn’t the parable of the yeast that leavens the bread just another way of saying that the old generations die off and the new generations are born with just a little more common sense and knowledge of right and wrong, than the previous generation, until after enough time passes the flour, earth’s people in this case, will be leavened by the yeast all through, by the Kingdom of Heaven, when heaven is leavened all throughout the world?

Having watched my mother baking bread, putting yeast and mixing the flour with water and watching the leavening process, after 5 or 6 hours rising and then kneading the dough to remove the bubbles of air from the leavened dough and waiting 3 or 4 hours for the final leaven to be cut and placed in the bread pans for baking.

Similarly I would say the yeast of Jesus has been working through the flour of earth for 2000 years and soon the world will be leavened all through and ready for the new heaven and the new earth. when the yeast of Jesus’ message will have completed its task and we will all be, finally, at-one-ment with each other’s humanity?

Your Jesus is a scammer and the fruits of that deception are pure evil. It lead to the death of Stephen and many other Christians persecuted by Jews. Then the Romans started persecuting Christians, then Roman Catholics started persecuting everybody, especially Jews (labelled Christ killers) and the problem continues till today. All that Jesus of Nazareth would have had to do was reveal the plan to the disciples that Sunday morning starting with Mary and all that mess would not have happened.

The “swoon theory” is not logical because a man who merely survived death would not have inspired such a movement as “The Way.” That being said, no one in their right mind would say something to give people the impression you wouldn’t die, whether it’s survive like Jonah or die then be raised from the dead, if you were planning to fake your death.

The body of Jesus is dead……….The message of the words is not dead……….but alive and well and “living” in those who love and seek the truth, hear the voice and are led by the Spirit. Why?

Because “……… my words will never pass away.”

John 16:16 “These things I have spoken to you, that you should not be made to stumble. 2 They will put you out of the synagogues; yes, the time is coming that whoever kills you (through words) will think that he offers God service. 3 And these things they will do to you because they have not known the Father nor Me.

Said Jesus: “The Spirit of the Truth, won’t draw attention to himself, but will make sense out of what is about to happen and, indeed, out of all that I have done and said. He will honor me; he will take from me and deliver it to you. Everything the Father has is also mine. That is why I’ve said, ‘He takes from me and delivers to you.’ ”

25 “These things I have spoken to you in figurative language; but the time is coming when I will no longer speak to you in figurative language, but I will tell you plainly about the Father.

Comments about Jesus being “ a scammer”, “fake” and pure evil”, are more despicable than anything you despise.

The death of Stephen and many other Christians came from the indiscretion of their own mouths; such is the ego of religious insanity. That companion of indiscreet, uncontrollable rage of emotion that brings about the demise of another or on the dare to another that brings about the demise of oneself. Do not disregard Proverbs 2:11
Discretion will guard you. Understanding will watch over you. (How blessed is the man who fears always, But he who hardens his heart (by pride and speaks with indiscretion) will fall into calamity.: He who guards his mouth and his tongue,
he guards his life from danger.
2The proud, haughty one: “scoffer” is his name;
he acts with arrogance of pride. New Living Translation
Watch your tongue and keep your mouth shut, and you will stay out of trouble.

Indiscretion and arrogant pride is what did Stephen in, not Jesus.

Here is what led to Stephen’s stoning:

Of the Council he was brought before Stephen brashly
accused them of being traitors and murderers

“You stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears! You always resist the Holy Spirit; as your fathers did, so do you. Which of the prophets did your fathers not persecute? And they killed those who foretold the coming of the Just One, of whom you now have become the betrayers and murderers, who have received the law by the direction of angels and have not kept it.”
When they heard these things they were cut to the heart, and they gnashed at him with their teeth. Then they cried out with a loud voice, stopped their ears, and ran at him with one accord; 58 and they cast him out of the city and stoned him.
Remembering that thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.….should make men shut their mouths in times when the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature that they may create a clear and present danger that such words will bring about the substantive evils from murdering persecutors near at hand which by common sense you have the right and duty to prevent by keeping your mouth shut.

Jesus entrusted himself to no man not even his brothers and nobody knows what Jesus whispered to Mary Magdalene on their Sunday morning meeting apart from what she might have actually revealed to the disciples, which scripture indicates that Jesus said not to hold him and to go tell the brethren he was preparing to leave them. Your idea of “all that mess would not have happened” is pure conjecture on your part without even any circumstantial scriptures to glean from, to support your speculation.

Jesus inspired the movement you speak of by his life and with the messages of how to live in harmony with humanity; it had nothing to do with his death. When Jesus appeared to the disciples they were already using their secret meeting safe house; the movement was already initiated and in progress before the arrest. It was his life, not his crucifixion that spawned the revolution of; the crucifixion was a consequence of his life not the master of his destiny as ye all suppose it is to the glory of the blood letting absurdity of religious sin justification.

And you think you know what the “right mind of Jesus” was? Compared to what? Your own?

“whom you had put to death by hanging Him on a cross.” Your Jesus allowed Peter to think the Jews had him “put to death,” but by your own statement Jesus was not put to death. Peter therefore bore false witness against these men because your Jesus didn’t fill his disciples in on the plan after the fact. Sure sounds like a blood libel to me. Your Jesus is a liar and lunatic.

Get to know the real Jesus Christ who is Lord and Saviour, you don’t even have to go into your closet.

Many modern descendants of the ancestors still say today what their ancestors said of Jesus 2000 years ago: “He hath a devil, and is mad; why hear ye him?” “He is a glutton and a drunk”. “A friend of sinners”, “He’s possessed by an evil spirit”, “a blasphemer”

Every word I’ve spoken to you is a Spirit-word, and so it is life-making. But some of you resist, refuse to have any part in this. Therefore many who having heard, said, “These words are difficult; who is able to hear it?”
After this many turned back and walked with him no more.

And Jesus continues: ‘These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me. They worship me in vain; their teachings are merely human rules.’

“Listen to this carefully. I’m warning you. There’s nothing done or said that can’t be forgiven. But if you persist in your slanders against God’s Holy Spirit, you are repudiating the very One who forgives, sawing off the branch on which you’re sitting, severing by your own perversity all connection with the One who forgives.”

Associating Jesus in the same sentence with the attributes of people devoid of goodness; tsk, tsk.

Oddly enough: The first mention of Paul in Bible History, the Paul so many Christians love to quote in Christian philosophy faith and belief and all manner of aspects and interpretation of Jesus’ life, whom Paul never met, was when he was known as Saul, the Christian-hating Pharisee who fanatically took part in the persecution and killing of Christians, including Stephen:

Acts 7:57-60 “Yelling and hissing, the mob drowned him out. Now in full stampede, they dragged him out of town and pelted him with rocks. The ringleaders took off their coats and asked a young man named Saul to watch them.

As the rocks rained down, Stephen prayed, “Master Jesus, take my life.” Then he knelt down, praying loud enough for everyone to hear, “Master, don’t blame them for this sin”—his last words. Then he died.. And Saul was consenting unto his death” (Acts 7:58-59,8:1 KJV)

You do greatly err by accusing Jesus of killing Stephen: Your character is flawed, your compassion nonexistent, your humanity is base, your religious insanity palpable, your mind diseased by supernaturalism; you have the reprobate brain of a sub human and you are trapped in the parasitism of the quintessential proselyte-seeking cleric, like a cuckoo bird: a largely grayish-brown (Cuculus canorus) parasite given to laying its eggs in the nests of other birds which hatch them and rear the offspring; AKA, a silly or slightly crackbrained person.

We know that the Son has come and has given us the knowledge of understanding not the belief but the knowledge, that we may know Him who is true; and we are in Him who is true, Jesus Christ. This is eternal life. The absence of which is what we call hell, hell is not a place you go, it is the absence of knowledge or the forfeiture of that knowledge because you love supernatural darkness.

Don’t blame me blame your Jesus. What did Peter say – “The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom you had put to death by hanging Him on a cross.” Looks like your Jesus mislead Peter, me and many others if the “swoon theory” is real.

“Being then the children of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and thought [contrivance] of man. Therefore having overlooked the times of ignorance [myths, fables and historical revisionism], God is now declaring to men that all people everywhere should repent, because He has fixed a day [Ezekiel 30:2-3] in which He will judge the world in righteousness through a Man [Jesus Christ/Yahshua Messiah] whom He has appointed, having furnished proof to all men by raising Him from the dead [Psalm 16:10; Acts 2:31].” (Acts 17:29-31)

When the Hebrew scriptures were translated into Greek in ancient Alexandria around 200 BC, the word “Hades” (the Greek underworld) was substituted for Sheol, and this is reflected in the New Testament where Hades is both the underworld of the dead “AND” the personification of the evil it represents.

“….a person, for example, regarded as representing or embodying a concept…..”

Personification is when you assign the qualities of a person to something that isn’t human or, in some cases, to something that isn’t even alive. There are many reasons for using personification. It can be used as a method of describing something so that others can understand. It can be used to emphasize a point. It is a commonly favored literary tool, and you may in fact use personification without even knowing it.

Have you read and thoroughly familiarized yourself with the solar concepts connected with the Winter Solstice which teach how the Sun was viewed by the Ancients as having died for 3 days and was raised to life on the 4th day, that day being December 25th? Well if you have you should be struck at the parallel in biblical accounts describing similes of 3 days like Jonah, Lazarus, Jesus being dead and raised after “3 days”. Don’t you think it rather “telling” that at one moment we are discussing the resurrection of a dead man and the next we are speaking in an allegory of light, darkness, sleep, death, and next the “light of the world” which to the Ancients was always the Sun? And why would Jesus delay going to Lazarus for two more days, until the fourth day, after hearing that Lazarus was entombed?

And that coupled with the literal historical interpretation of the raising of Lazarus or “El-Azar-Us” (El simply meaning “the” for the Egyptian word we recognize today as Osiris). In that case, It seems we are right back to where we have been since the beginning; namely are we to interpret the stories in our New Testament as “literal occurrences” or “allegories” that expressed Divine Truths which were later “literalized?

In the “Pyramid Texts” we first find a unique play on words when we look at the word Bethany. Where did Lazarus supposedly live? He is mentioned as living at Bethany. The word “Bethany, when translated back into the Egyptian language is “Beth-anu” and it means the House of the Sun?

The sacred Scriptures and the Christian faith were once taught prior to the beginning of the Orthodox Roman Church but they began to repress such information and knowledge. Most of these spiritual truths are the teachings of the earlier Christianity, that Christians fail to hear today. These earlier Christian truths concerning God, Christ, and the Soul were by self-serving men who controlled the Christian religion from Rome and tried to keep these truths from mankind over the last eighteen centuries.

It is most difficult today for us to determine the truth of the ancients because they are so long ago and much has been lost including the centuries of Christian book burning (like the burning of the Alexandrian library and its 700,000 volumes by Rome in the 4th century) Unfortunately we are left with imaginings that may or may not lead to any absolute certainty but can only make sense through individual perception from a subjective global eye. And so thousands of doctrinal interpretations abound like tentacles of a jellyfish conspiring to capture the minds of proselyte voters. And once captivated, willingly support the conspiracist catering closest to their mindset.

After a bunch of second thoughts, I apologize to you for using such harsh rhetoric in Post 47; I don’t think you deserve that kind of scathing abuse. You do have a good sense about you; wrong in MHO, but from your overall communication I think you are a good person, searching still.

Leo, you continue to talk about Heaven and you don’t believe a thing about it !

I’m just calling your hand, call me mean spirited or whatever you want but you have no problem denigrating believers with your rhetoric and pigeon holing Christians as mindless buffoons, so now I’m calling your hand.

You got nothing, your doctrine is bankrupt and you need to buy gold tried in the fire from the real Jesus so that you may become rich, clothed and with sight.

Rev 3:18 I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see.
Rev 3:19 As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.
Rev 3:20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.
Rev 3:21 To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.
Rev 3:22 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches

I believe in the heaven that Jesus talked about and the heaven Jesus told us is not a supernatural external concept as you believe it is. When you start believing Jesus instead of the false heaven you’ve been taught and just can’t let go of, then you will be on the Jesus page.

I have asked you many times before to tell me where you think your heaven is and you won’t, either because you can’t or refuse to tell me or the truth is you just don’t know but will not admit you don’t know.

People who know truth speak truth those who don’t, can only quote scriptures.

Leo, there is no point, you will just twist the scriptures if I explain it.

Heaven is where God dwells, it’s outside space and time, it’s the spiritual realm. It’s also a place in our hearts where the Spirit of Christ dwells. Location has no meaning to God, He can dwell everywhere at the same time but we cannot comprehend this in our finite minds.

God does not dwell in those that reject His son Jesus Christ. Only those that have the Son, have life and those that do not have the Son do not have life. The Spirit of Christ will raise us from dead just as Jesus was raised from the dead.

That’s Heaven my friend…..

Rom 8:11 If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in you.

It’s May, so I’ve been busy explaining to RC why Acts 1: 14 says “and Mary the mother of Jesus” so I haven’t been paying as much attention as I would’ve liked to Jason’s blog in the last while.

With WTI oil at 47.88 USD/BBL I don’t know if I’ll be busy or slow this year but I’ll definitely keep in touch. I enjoy this blog and your posts even when we don’t agree. Obviously, are main disagreement stems from my belief in the supernatural, can’t do much about that.

“He can dwell everywhere at the same time but we cannot comprehend this in our finite minds.”

IF anything in that sentence cannot be comprehended by the finite mind then how can a finite mind even make such a statement?

That statement is in itself exemplifies the fallacy that believers continue to make. On the one hand you say you cannot understand it while on the other hand you say that you understand why you cannot understand it.

It is so laughable to sane people when you say that you understand what you cannot understand and you can’t see that?

Now Naz you should be able to understand this:

Jesus said: “No one can come to the Father except through me”. But he also said that “No man can come to me, except the Father……..draw him

AND, Jesus said The kingdom of God does not come by observation because the Kingdom of God(Heaven) is not an external entity which you can see; in other words, Heaven being the Kingdom where the Father resides is not external and is not visible because why? wait for it……heaven (the Kingdom of God) is within you.

That is the concept of Heaven in a nutshell and if you can’t see that you are not really looking. None of these words are mine, they are written that Jesus said those words.

Jesus did not say that the Father was outside space and time, that’s a twist that others claim, that church dogma claims; that you claim, that preachers teach children to claim but how can that be remotely true when you immediately have to add that you cannot comprehend it with your finite mind. It just does not make sense!

Jesus did not claim that “Location has no meaning to God, He can dwell everywhere at the same time……….” show me anywhere in the Gospels where Jesus said such things, even hinted at such things? And I know you can’t because I have mastered every word Jesus is reputed to have ever said. And while there are several things Jesus said that I do not know what he was talking about there is only one thing in particular, I cannot understand what he meant, something I still wonder about. But if I cannot understand what he was talking about nobody else does either, that is how confident I am about knowing Jesus and his message.

Oh and Mary? Mary, the grocery clerk cashier, served me at the store today. lol.

Mary was the most common name given to girls every year from the beginning of record-keeping through 1961 (at least back to 1800) through 1961 (except for a six-year dip to #2, behind Linda).

And then it happened. In 2011, according to the latest report from the Social Security Administration (SSA), Mary fell three more places, to 112th. In absolute numbers, the number of girls given the name Mary at birth has fallen 94 percent since 1961.

Explanation? The modernization theory of name trends, advanced most famously by the sociologist Stanley Lieberson, sees the rise of individualism in modern naming practices. “As the role of the extended family, religious rules, and other institutional pressures declines,” he wrote, “choices are increasingly free to be matters of taste.” Mary—both a traditional American name and a symbol of religious Christianity—embodies this trend.

“All things have been handed over to Me by My Father, and no one knows who the Son is except the Father, and who the Father is except the Son, and anyone to whom the Son wills to reveal Him.” (Luke 10:22)

Thinking there must be “many paths to God” suffers from committing either of two critical errors: a misconstrued conception of arrogance or a misguided application of irrationality.

The reality of our eternity allows for a selection from only two options: the narrow gate or the wide gate [Matthew 7:13-14].

Even the bible speaks of the plurality of Gods. Elohim (Hebrew: אֱלֹהִים) is a grammatically plural noun for “gods” or “Deity” in Biblical Hebrew. In the modern it is often times referred to in the singular despite the -im ending that denotes plural masculine nouns in Hebrew.

And there he built an altar and called the place El-bethel, because there God had revealed [plural verb] himself to him when he fled from his brother. Genesis 35:7, ESV

Here the Hebrew verb “revealed” is plural, hence: “the-gods were revealed”. A NET Bible note claims that the Authorized Version wrongly translates: “God appeared unto him”. This is one of several instances where the Bible uses plural verbs with the name elohim.

Marti Steussy, in Chalice Introduction to the Old Testament, discusses: “The first verse of Psalm 82: ‘Elohim has taken his place in the divine council.’ Here elohim has a singular verb and clearly refers to God. But in verse 6 of the Psalm, God says to the other members of the council, ‘You [plural] are elohim.’ Here elohim has to mean gods.”

In any case figments of the imagination.

He called them Gods to whom the word of God came, as Jesus claimed to be the son referencing that scripture why can not others equally use the same verse to speak of themselves? So that the sons of Gods are always with us.

So what’s your wiggle room to explain this?

The God Fallacy is based primarily in the imagination of those claiming to speak for, from, with, to, on behalf of,…………….God ………and in the next sentence says God is incomprehensible and in the next breath but this is what it means…..

God, He can dwell everywhere at the same time but we cannot comprehend this in our finite minds.

God does not dwell in those that reject His son Jesus Christ. BUT How can you know this part while yet claiming we cannot comprehend this. That’s Trumpism, Dogmatism, Nazism and exposes one’s inability to understand Jesus even at the human level let alone the godly level.

In the case of the Theory of Obstinacy, one has to prepare to go it alone when one is right while meeting disapproval from everybody who is wrong. Seeking approval, honor and accolades from others is the face of admission that you follow the crowd; how then, can you know what is right, do what is right while seeking the approval of and by following 666 billion people who are wrong?

Although intellect and talent were vital to the preeminent scientists of the 20th century, it was ultimately their individual personalities and quirks that drove each to great discoveries. Albert Einstein’s youthful self-confidence, Paul Dirac’s innate eccentricities, Fred Hoyle’s explicit obstinacy, Martin Ryle’s shrewd competitiveness, Richard Feynman’s love of the unconventional, Jocelyn Bell-Burnell’s steadfast doggedness and Stephen Hawking’s brilliant conviction are truly responsible for transforming our understanding of life and the universe.

In the same way that LeoTheGreater’s unique insight in parsing the Philosophical Divide of religion by interpreting perfectly the God Concept of the one known as Jesus Christ to a resisting world set in the superstitious stone-chiseled ancient world of the supernatural, will transform the world that Jesus explained so clearly in the Gospels that dispelled the world of the ancient chiselers who mythed the truth.

“If you follow the crowd, you will likely get no further than the crowd. If you walk alone, you’re likely to end up in places no one has ever been before. Being an achiever is not without its difficulties, for peculiarity breeds contempt. The unfortunate thing about being ahead of your time is that when people finally realize you were right, they’ll simply say it was obvious to everyone all along. You have two choices in life. You can dissolve into the main stream, or you can choose to become an achiever and be distinct. To be distinct, you must be different. To be different, you must strive to be what no else but you can be (by what you see).” ― Alan Ashley-Pitt

Truly, truly, I tell you, we speak of what we know, and we testify to what we have seen, and yet you people do not accept our testimony. Yet instead of facing the evidence and accepting it, you procrastinate with questions. If I have told you about earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you about heavenly things? No one has ascended into heaven except the One who descended from heaven even the Son of Man which is in Heaven. J 3:11-13

Leo, you are a contradiction, you quote scriptures that plainly speak of supernatural things and yet you deny the supernatural.

“If I have told you about earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you about heavenly things? No one has ascended into heaven except the One who descended from heaven even the Son of Man which is in Heaven.”

Surprisingly many who consider themselves Christians believe Jesus is the way but the only way to Jesus is through Mary, priest/minister, church, with Mary being the best way.

Don’t let the trend about girls being named Mary fool you. I re-engaged with RC after a 30 year silence barring a few very frustrating encounters – “The New Evangelization” lol. JPll was totally Mary’s (apparently his motto) and I’m not certain but anecdotally it seems his papacy has a major role in the upswing in Marian devotions.

Within a few hundred years “Mary the mother of Jesus” became the “queen of heaven.” For the explanation see Acts 19: 27: “the great goddess Diana …… whom all Asia and the world worshippeth.” All those who worshipped the great goddess Diana became Catholic and changed Christianity instead of letting Christ change them.

Don’t do your victory dance on the triumph of the natural over the supernatural yet. The RCC says they worship the same God as Islam. Islam is founded on the moon god cult. The moon is the celestial body associated with the “queen of heaven.” The RC Mary is the “queen of heaven.” Mohammad had a daughter named Fatima. The “queen of heaven” appeared at Fatima. RC pray to the “queen of heaven” for success of the ecumenical movement (this is a false movement). RC now think Moonday is the first day of the week and Sunday is the seventh day of the week. Just wait and see what happens when 100’s of millions of Muslims become RC.

30 years ago I was told there was no salvation outside of the RCC. Now I’m a separated brethren and we all worship the same “God.” Now that’s something, but don’t question a RC, Muslim or Ephesian to much or they get very protective of their god/goddess.

Scriptures do not necessarily speak of supernatural things, it is you who constantly interpret them that way; that’s your mindset, where your level of understanding has ascended to but from my point of view it is where your mindset has descended to.

John Adams ascended to the presidency in 1797.

She worked as a clerk before ascending to her current position.

Nothing supernatural about these sentences or definitions such as:

to go or move up to slope upward,

to ascend upward over the brow of a hill, ascending over a hill’s horizon

to succeed to : occupy

moving to a different, more powerful position

to go up : CLIMB, RISE

The old Apostle’s creed stated:

“…..our Lord, who was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died and was buried; he descended into hell; on the third day he rose again from the dead; he ascended into heaven, and is seated at the right hand of God the Father almighty; from there he will come to judge the living and the dead…….”

Why is he sitting at the right hand of God the Father? Do you suppose it was because God the Father is not left handed?

After Philip baptized the Eunuch, “…….the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more: and he went on his way rejoicing.

40 But Philip was found at Azotus:

People of a supernatural bent see this scripture as the hocus pocus, poof poof and philip disappeared before the very eyes of the Eunuch and reappeared immediately at Azotus, teleported away……The importance is in getting Philip to Azotus.

Philip is subject to a sudden disappearance. The language is indicative of a supernatural exit but Azotus was about 60 miles away and zI don’t see anything supernatural about being led, taken, snatched, caught away by the spirit whether he walked or jogged or rode on horseback but then I don’t read the bible with a supernatural eye nor do I read everything in a literal meaning like the right hand of God the Father; the “right hand” means something more than merely “the right hand”. But you, Naz, are not there yet.

I speak to you of heavenly things because heavenly things exist in my mind and they exist in everybody’s mind………..if you let them………. but not everybody does; there exists in some peoples’ minds, horrific things, unimaginable things, hellish things, things that can never exist in heaven.

It is very difficult to keep heaven pure and chaste and honorable and perfect and virtuous; it is wonderful if we can touch the closeness of those things occasionally, even emotionally joyous to linger there but the world always has a way of interfering…….especially when we are behind the wheel of a motor vehicle where we are apt to become bears on a short wick.

We need to be ever mindful to work diligently on growing longer wicks.

If I am correct, not only does heaven exists but heaven will happen just like the parable of the measures of flour mixed with water and yeast where the leaven as the message of heaven will work its way through humanity; albeit slowly, until the dough is leavened all through; in other words, and it may sound humorous, every human is a doughhead…….AND this also cannot come by observation for it is like watching your hair grow in the mirror or your fingernails; it is not observable that way but when it finally does occur and I believe it will, that is when suffering and crying will stop, slowly, and even now we see longevity increasing. As diseases are conquered we creep toward the time of immortality, the eternal, forever and ever when the final enemy will be defeated, death itself.

We see tremendous advances in genetics, stem cell research, organs grown in the lab from personal cell structures that are not resistant to rejuvenated organs, immunology trials arming the body itself to fight cancerous tumors. When that heaven arrives we will be like self-cloning entities; humankind will rise to become what you believe exists already, the supernatural! But we will become super naturally, as the doughheads create their nano-technology for medicine delivery that targets particular micro structures among many other aspects of a quantum world at our fingertips.

But doughheads will not rise to the leaven of heaven by designing bombs to kill their fellow man, by destruction and destroying life; heaven will only be accomplished when those elements of societies are themselves supplanted and eliminated and I don’t have to tell you what types will remain outside the Eternal City.

And we know those types will suffer the wrath of the Son of Man coming in the clouds targeting those who indiscriminately take the lives of the innocents and that targeting will be without remedy.

Life and the Sanctity of Life will endure but death races to its own end. LIFE FORCES AND FORGES THE SUPREME REIGN, necessarily.

That is the Concept of Heaven as I see it (Immortality being the dream of every man woman and child) and it has only got to do with our own super natural ability to pursue that course toward its eventual reality. Everybody needs to build a scaffold in their mind to bring heaven out in the open where it can be seen, used and benefit others to each according to s/he’s own ability. To those who have much, much will be expected and to those who have less, less will be required.

In a business or scientific research facility not everybody is the CEO and not everybody is the janitor but nobody ploughing the field will be muzzled because every laborer is worthy of his wages.

Jesus was a man of common sense and he would work on behalf of and for, the common man, the poor man, the downtrodden, he would not be part of the deceptive clergy taking people for a ride all their lives under falsehoods and lies about the rewards and treasures in the heaven, in the afterlife which Jesus knew no such afterlife existed.

BUT he did know and accept that the Kingdom of God, the real god he called Father did exist but existed not externally in the supernatural but indeed existed internally, within you, in a place where all men could enter into spiritually but flesh and blood could not go and partake of, if only, if only, the masses knew.

Then would they see that heaven is not a place you go to but a place that you bring here to earth from within and so he coined the famous Lord’s Prayer, Father who art in heaven, (within), hallowed and holy and revered is your name for you are the true God that exists; your Kingdom come, and we ask that thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven.

Jesus headed in to meet with his cousin John The Baptist that would mark the beginning of his ministry to the world. And which he lamented in John 7:1, “After these things Jesus walked in Galilee: for he would not walk in Jewry, because the Jews sought to kill him”; AND, 7:7 “The (religious) world cannot hate you; but me it hateth, because I testify of it, that the works thereof are evil.
And with these thoughts in mind Jesus accepted his directive from within, knowing full well that the religious establishment would hate him as he left for solitude in the desert.

Prayer is to meditate; giving thought to important issues that need resolution.
This is an interesting topic. I often thought why do people even “pray” out loud? That is not the kind of prayer that Jesus messaged.

Jesus said: “When you pray don’t do like the hypocrites who think they will be heard for their much speaking, For they love to pray standing in the Church and on the corners of streets, that they may seen of men. Assuredly, I say to you, they have their reward”

“But you, when you pray, go into your room (the closet, the room is your own mind) and when you have shut your door,(shut out the world so you are in the stillness of silent contemplation, meditate—few people know it but rearranging the letters in silent you get listen and vice versa because they are the same, you can only be silent when you listen) to your Father who is in the secret place;(the Kingdom seat that is within you is his secret abode) and your Father who sees in secret will reward you openly.)

“And when you pray, (in the presence of others for edification, solace and comfort, for example) do not use vain repetitions as the heathen do. For they think that they will be heard for their many words.”

“So He said to them, “When you pray, say: Our Father in heaven,(the Kingdom where the Father lives within you) Hallowed be Your name. Your kingdom(within us) come. Your will be done On earth as it is (in the Kingdom spirit world, within) in heaven.”

And that is the duty of those who claim to understand the message of Jesus, to manifest that kingdom within, out in the open(not under a tub) where it can be seen, enjoyed, and be beneficial to others.

TIDBIT OF TACTICAL THEOLOGY:

Here is an illustration that you cannot possibly fail to understand what the “Lord’s Prayer” means; an analogy of how a simple idea was conceived in “heaven”(in the mind, where you-know-who resides) and brought to earth (where his “Will” was done on earth as it was in heaven) as prototypes. I call it the story of a “tidbit of tactical theology”:

Earle Dickson was employed as a cotton buyer for the Johnson & Johnson in 1921. His wife Josephine Dickson was always cutting her fingers in the kitchen while preparing food.
At that time a bandage consisted of separate gauze and adhesive tape that you would cut to size and apply yourself. Earle Dickson noticed that gauze and adhesive tape she used would soon fall off her active fingers. He decided to invent something that would stay in place and protect small wounds better.

Earle Dickson took a piece of gauze and attached it to the center of a piece of tape, and then covered the product with crinoline to keep it sterile. His boss, James Johnson, saw Earle Dickson’s invention and decided to manufacture it to the public and make Earle Dickson vice-president of Johnson & Johnson. The Band-Aid was born on earth!

Sales of Band-Aids were slow until Johnson & Johnson decided to give Boy Scout troops free Band-Aids as a publicity stunt. By 1924, Band-Aids were machine made, sold sterilized in 1939, and made with vinyl tape in 1958. Billions and billions of people have been helped around the world by the simple Band-Aid, like the sun that shines on everybody, like the rain that falls and nourishes everyone, the religious and the non religious alike have been the recipients of this little health helper; a beautiful tidbit of tactical theology, the simple, unpretentious, unobtrusive Band-Aid.

I wrote a letter to Johnson & Johnson asking them if they could give me an estimate of how many billions or trillions of bandaids were made available to the public since Earle Dickson invented the bandaid. They said it was a trade secret

If the religious based their understanding on knowledge instead of belief, they would not be praying, chanting, finger beading, bowing, hen-pecking and praising the supernatural gods of men; they would reflect on the inner self witness, the righteous conscience Jesus always referred to: the Father, not Zeus or Gods by any name then could we civilize faster toward a human race at-one-ment (atonement) with each other instead of factions fractured by divisive religions, myths, miracles, magic and murderous mayhem.

I disagree that any act Jesus did was supernatural. Jesus was a common sense person. The events that happened are explainable and I can easily explain most but remember that the masses were brainwashed by the clergy to expect that everything not easily understood would be an act of supernaturalism, Jesus debunked this supernaturalism and debunked the supernatural gods of men.
“Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.”

Jesus is merely acknowledging that the internal brain is where resides the essence of man, not that which comes by observation which the religionists always believed. The Kingdom consists of a fantastic organ called the brain with phenomenal functions; it is a bundle of experiences, sensory perceptions, trials and errors, learned behaviors and meticulous observations all housed in a fantastic brain that essentially functions as the guiding spirit within from all of the above and if there ever was a personal god, it is this brain function in conjunction with memory that is the true Father and the true Kingdom of Heaven and indeed the only God and therefore by extension, we too, are Gods.

Now on one of those days Jesus/Yahshua and His disciples got into a boat, and He said to them, “Let us go over to the other side of the lake.” So they launched out. But as they were sailing along He fell asleep; and a fierce gale of wind descended on the lake, and they began to be swamped and to be in danger. They came to Jesus/Yahshua and woke Him up, saying, “Master, Master, we are perishing!” And He got up and rebuked the wind and the surging waves, and they stopped, and it became calm. And He said to them, “Where is your faith?” They were fearful and amazed, saying to one another, “Who then is this, that He commands even the winds and the water, and they obey Him?” (Luke 8:22-25)

“The Kingdom consists of a fantastic organ called the brain with phenomenal functions; it is a bundle of experiences, sensory perceptions, trials and errors, learned behaviors and meticulous observations all housed in a fantastic brain that essentially functions as the guiding spirit within from all of the above and if there ever was a personal god, it is this brain function in conjunction with memory that is the true Father and the true Kingdom of Heaven and indeed the only God and therefore by extension, we too, are Gods. ”

This is the biggest load of hogwash I have ever heard. It doesn’t even deserve a response.

You have been wrong all your life and erroneously lulled into the sleepiness of fantasy; I don’t expect you to throw out all the waste you have been functioning on nor do I expect you to see anything beyond the unreasonable assumption of the supernatural. Your destiny is where you remain, where you are comfortable living in your paranormal cemetery.

Both you and Frank are content in the supernatural where the wind and storms submit to the whims of men using embellished accounts of miracles that never happened to keep you in thrall.

Your literal interpretation is amazing in a day of high technology and weather reports across the USA of floods and tornados and complete devastation of entire swathes of landscapes, including churches that are blown away as easily as the roof on your house. It seems to me you guys with your awesome ability to believe should be able to pray away the destruction and save lives everyday but some of us know exactly why you cannot for all your hooting and hollering about knowing what you are talking about. Oh you have belief, you have tons of belief; it’s just your knowledge that is slim pickings to none. And your literal interpretive nonsense has you grasping at straws impossible to suck up anything but things that make no sense.

And you think i’m the one making nonsense out of common sense because I don’t side with your superstitious mind.

And Frank says to Jesus: “we too, are Gods.” is the oldest ploy in the Book. What a way to denigrate Jesus who used the same “ploy” that you pay lip service to but don’t know the first thing about him……………

Leo, it’s not a matter of what kind of mind one brings to the table, it’s a matter of reading what the text says.

I am not reading the supernatural into the scriptures because the supernatural is clearly already there. You have forced your own interpretation on the scriptures without no support other than your own made up Leo-ology with no scripture to back it up.

Your view is pure fantasy and cannot be backed by the scriptures. The scriptures are painfully clear that Jesus Christ died and rose from the dead. Any Atheist will tell you that is what it says. The same Atheist will also call it a bunch of nonsense and throw the whole thing out which is what they should do if they don’t believe it. You on the other hand create your own version of Jesus and your own Leo-ology to suit your fancy. Like I told you a million times, this is intellectually dishonest, and you know it.

Naz, you need to take ESL so you can learn about metaphors, similes, idioms, cultural expressions, figures of speech. like the “Nakedness of the Father” that Ham uncovered, for example expressing incestuous relationship which offspring was the Noah-accursed Canaan child.

Also remember “to descend into Sheol” or raise from the dead does not necessarily to be dead in order to express the evil it represents. I know it’s a little intellectually deep but you have to understand depth of thought or you’ll remain floating on every wave on the water like a leaf blowing at the mercy of the wind.

Then only those alive, when the technology is advanced enough, would benefit from your type of heaven if I understand you.

Is the scfi movie “The 6th Day,” cloning and downloading ones memories then implanting them into the clone, representative of what you are proposing? If DNA was found/preserved in the future a clone could be made but the memories are lost.

if you really want to see that the supernatural IS NOT THERE just go to Exodus at the story…..”when the Lord told Moses when the Pharaoh asks for a miracle tell Aaron to throw down his staff and it will turn into a snake…”.

Now anybody reading this story will clearly see that the only clear part of the story is that it was a magic trick, subsequently performed by Pharaoh’s own magicians and that is how your supernatural miracles began. What is the matter with your mind that you can’t follow that simple story but still insist that it was supernatural. You are daft man, daft I say.

I don’t know exactly how that would work since we know that everything turns into dust as per the mummified remains found; all I can say about that now is I hope I am still alive and have not bitten the dust; otherwise I do not have any explanation about that. It is said by some that every life line has all the memories of all the lifeline thus everybody living today is from a consecutive lifeline still existing in the world. The lifeline would presumably stop if no children are birthed from the lifeline members such as when an only child may not have children and the parents themselves had no siblings from their relationship but then there are many branches from the roots, cousins and nieces and so on and genetics now can determine ancestry branches still surviving and are marketing the new genetics as 23.com to find out your ancestry.

Maybe you can come up with some ideas how a resurrection may happen, barring the supernatural, of course and sci-fi.

Leo, I already called your hand and you got nothing…..Your theology is bankrupt.

Act 2:22 “Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus of Nazareth, a man attested to you by God with mighty works and wonders and signs that God did through him in your midst, as you yourselves know—
Act 2:23 this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men.
Act 2:24 God raised him up, loosing the pangs of death, because it was not possible for him to be held by it.
Act 2:25 For David says concerning him, “‘I saw the Lord always before me, for he is at my right hand that I may not be shaken;
Act 2:26 therefore my heart was glad, and my tongue rejoiced; my flesh also will dwell in hope.
Act 2:27 For you will not abandon my soul to Hades, or let your Holy One see corruption.
Act 2:28 You have made known to me the paths of life; you will make me full of gladness with your presence.’
Act 2:29 “Brothers, I may say to you with confidence about the patriarch David that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us to this day.
Act 2:30 Being therefore a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that he would set one of his descendants on his throne,
Act 2:31 he foresaw and spoke about the resurrection of the Christ, that he was not abandoned to Hades, nor did his flesh see corruption.
Act 2:32 This Jesus God raised up, and of that we all are witnesses.

I see we are back to where we started this discussion string 3 weeks ago, claiming that Jesus is the only true path to heaven and everyone else’s sacred scriptures are a lie. I think there are 4 billion people on the planet who would disagree with you and would be disappointed with your assessment of the validity of their religious beliefs. And the billion or so agnostics and atheists probably think you’re all full of it, given that all of the sacred scriptures of all of the world’s major religions are based on mythologies that were written at a time when the authors of those texts were utterly ignorant of the age of the universe and the solar system, had no knowledge of celestial mechanics and plate tectonics and were completely clueless about the germ theory of disease, evolutionary biology and molecular genetics.

Bob, I don’t know who told you that sacred scriptures were based on mythologies. Furthermore I don’t see how plate tectonics and germ theory has anything to do with the topic on hand. If education and knowledge was the answer then all the world’s problems would be solved, obviously that is not the case and this world and its people have a myriad of problems.

As for other world religions, why do they all have to be valid ? Who made this rule ? Bob, I know you did not come to these conclusions on your own and I realize we are all a product of our society to some degree. Your thoughts are the prevailing thoughts of the masses in the age we live in. For your benefit I want you to know that you are being fed a lie and will continue to be fed a lie about what truth is. I don’t say this to disparage your secular beliefs but I say it really to help you.

I hope one day you will see clearly that Jesus is the only way, not because I want to win an argument, but because it’s the truth.

Without the supernatural I don’t see “regeneration” and “you also” being applicable in Matthew 19: 28.

Knowledge is increasing exponentially, but it may not be possible in the foreseeable future to do what the scifi movies show.

There has been some talk of life expectancies being greatly increased naturally as you have also heard. Apparently our cells should keep replicating but over time they degrade and we get sick and die. If they can find what causes this and stop it, then the cells can replicate without mutation and who knows how long will could live then.

Medicine is also making huge advances and illness, disease, injuries that once were fatal will be cured/repaired. Depending on what killed someone the dead will even be raised most likely.

These natural advances would not bring about the biblical prophecies of heaven on earth though. A natural Jesus made promises only a supernatural Jesus could bring about.

There are some advances in human maturity but if you scratch the surface we still are very similar to the stone age except now we have more powerful weapons. And I’m afraid of a huge backlash coming. There’s a lot of very angry people in the natural and supernatural these days or at least so it seems. Since I do not see a supernatural world view in and of itself being intrinsically evil I don’t blame the supernatural, bad people do bad things.

And the Lord said to Paul in the night by a vision, “Do not be afraid any longer, but go on speaking and do not be silent; for I am with you, and no man will attack you in order to harm you, for I have many people in this city.” And he settled there a year and six months, teaching the word of God among them. But while Gallio was proconsul of Achaia, the Jews with one accord rose up against Paul and brought him before the judgment seat, saying, “This man persuades men to worship God contrary to the law.” (Acts 18:9-13)

Note the charge by the Jews against Paul was “PERSUADES men to worship God contrary to the law”. Even Paul’s enemies acknowledged that he did not present his message by coercion or force of arms [as indeed others who speak of God have done and continue to do]. The Gospel is DECLARED by true Christians. It’s not put forth by intimidation. It’s PROCLAIMED, not inflicted. For its Truth calls sinners to repentance [Luke 5:32]. Messiah says, “Freely you received, freely give.” (Matthew 10:8) The Great Commission we received from Him was this: “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. [This based upon His Person & work as Creator & Redeemer of creation.] Go therefore and make disciples [followers/adherents/students] of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” (Matthew 28:18-20) Followers of Messiah are called upon to bring God’s light into a darkened world having been taught and serving to teach that, “It is He [God] who changes the times and the epochs; He removes kings and establishes kings; He gives wisdom to wise men and knowledge to knowers of understanding.” (Daniel 2:21)

I think you should reassess then abandon your own stale, ignorant, stereotyped convictions concerning Biblical insights into matters of origin. Do some genuine research. You’ll discover a whole new perspective on being “completely clueless”.

Given the personal testimony of this individual’s struggles with Islam; I urge you not to engage in misrepresenting & stereotyping anyone’s convictions/worldview by lumping faith/trust in The One True Eternal Creator God of The Bible with belief in Allah of the Quran.

And they [the brethren/saints] overcame him [the accuser/adversary/Satan] by the blood of the Lamb [Christ Jesus/Messiah Yahshua], and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death. (Revelation 12:11)

A man of knowledge moves with light and there is no darkness therein; a man of faith moves in darkness where there is no light: Walk while ye have the light, lest darkness come upon you: for he that walketh in darkness knoweth not whither he goeth.

You quote the words, pay lip service and believe you are quoting righteous light by faith. Faith is a disposition that invokes the activity of a second party; it brings somebody, something, into action on your behalf. You’re exercising faith at this moment in the seat that supports your weight.

What’s your faith doing for that seat? Nothing! Except let it be a bench, on your behalf. It isn’t your faith that supporting your weight, it’s the chair.

That’s why, never congratulate a man on his faith, that’s sheer stupidity. Faith never made a man great. Faith is simply that disposition that allows God to be as big as God is, in a man, that’s all. Congratulate Him. The one who’s BE-ing. And if you’re worried about your faith there’s one cure: get acquainted. Faith brings you to knowledge so you can know. It comes by giving knowledge time enough, to talk to you long enough, until at last you know enough and that’s the only cure for the ignorance of darkness when you walk in faith …..knowledge to know what light source, the self witness, the father within, a gut feeling like a Guts(gust) of wind, like a ghost of wind, good gosh

1. excessively credulous belief in and reverence for supernatural beings.

2. a widely held but unjustified belief in supernatural causation leading to certain consequences of an action or event, or a practice based on such a belief.

synonyms: myth, belief, old wives’ tale, legend, story

I agree that radical Islam is the current biggest threat to world peace and the actions someone takes in the name of their religious beliefs is one set of criteria that can be used to judge the validity of one belief system over another. I would submit, however, that such criteria are not to best means for deciding whose God is the one true God, or more fundamentally, whether or not there is a God in the first place. Whether one is comparing the Old and New Testaments, the Quran or the Rig Vedas, the sacred scriptures are replete with tales of supernatural beings and events. Given the mythologies depicted in these scriptures are 2500, 2000 and 1300 years old and modern day scientific tradition is only 250 years old, it is understandable that the text’s authors would fill in the blanks in their knowledge of the natural world by resorting to supernatural explanations. How someone, today, is to interpret these mythologies is the real question that should to be addressed. I see two options.

If the most vocal proponents of religion advocated treating scriptural tales of the supernatural as metaphors for moral behavior or allegorical literary tools to teach moral lessons, I would acknowledge the value of that approach. The primary function of all religious systems is to promote moral social behavior. Treating the mythologies as morality metaphors would be worthy of further study for the sake of peaceful coexistence of all cultures. Such an approach would also provide a basis for understanding why people believe what they believe, something I find equally worthy of further study.

My perception, however, is that this is not what the most vocal religious advocates want. My perception is they want me to go on a journey of intellectual discovery which will lead me to a personal revelation that the scriptural mythologies are in fact literal truth, the absolute, inerrant word of God. That is not a journey I am willing to make. Anyone educated in the scientific tradition, with even a modest ability to apply critical thinking skills, would recognize scriptural tales of the supernatural as obviously false, in direct contradiction with established scientific fact. I have no intention of substituting 250 years of scientific knowledge with 2500 year old superstition. I am not willing to make such a journey of “discovery” and consider that an insult to my intelligence. I will, however, continue to explore option one, if for no other reason than to continue my efforts to better define my own personal beliefs about what constitutes knowledge, moral behavior and truth.

Your comments (Post 99) are without exception. a noteworthy explanation for the magic to be found in knowledge, in science…………..

There are things that not even the best scientists today can explain but that doesn’t mean that we should block off investigation by resorting to phony explanations invoking magic or the supernatural which don’t actually explain at all.

Just imagine how a medieval man, even the most educated man of his era would have reacted if he had seen a jet plane, a laptop computer, a cell phone, a satlab device; he would have called them supernatural, miraculous but these devices are now commonplace; we know how they work.

People have built them, following scientific principles. There never was a need to invoke magic or miracles or the supernatural. We now see that the medieval man would have been wrong to do so.

The very idea of levitation has long been a byword for the supernatural, for mysterious magic. And I am going to show you a little film now, a demonstration from the superconductivity group of Tel Aviv University: of a feat of levitation that’s done by purely naturalistic physics, quantum physics. Levitation is no longer a miracle, it’s physics.

AND

The more you think about it the more you realize the very idea of a supernatural miracle is nonsense. If something happens that appears to be inexplicable by science you can safely conclude one of two things: either it didn’t really happen, the observer was mistaken or was lying or was tricked; or, we have exposed a shortcoming in present day science. If present day science encounters an observation or an experimental result that it cannot explain, then we should not rest until we have improved our science so that it can provide an explanation.

If it requires a radically new kind of science, a revolutionary science so strange that old scientists scarcely recognize it as science at all that’s fine too, it happened before but don’t ever be lazy enough, defeatist enough, cowardly enough to say “I don’t understand it so it must be supernatural, it must be a miracle”; say instead, “It’s a puzzle, it’s strange, it’s a challenge that we should rise to”.

Whether we rise to the challenge by questioning the truth of the observation or by expanding our science in new and exciting directions the proper and brave response to any such challenge is to tackle it head on. And until we have found a proper answer to the mystery it’s perfectly okay to simply say, “This is something we don’t yet understand but we’re working on it”. It’s the only honest thing to do.

Miracles, magic, myths, they can be fun and we can have fun with them. Everybody likes a good story and I hope readers of this book will enjoy the myths which begin each chapter throughout the Magic of Reality. But even more I hope they enjoy the science that comes after the myths and I hope you agree that the truth has a magic of its own. The truth is more magical in the best and most exciting sense of the word than any myth or made up mystery or miracle. Science has its own magic, The Magic of Reality. rdawkins

The sermon preached by Peter was an extraordinary gift of oratory for describing what Peter BELIEVED but not necessarily what was actually true, starting from the speaking in tongues and continuing on to a crowd of such size it was worthy of a Billy Graham Crusade. But I must ask you:

IS This the same Peter who told Jesus “I will die for you”. Was what Peter said merely Peter’s belief? I ask because belief can prompt reactions whether they have any basis in truth or knowledge or neither.

Jn 13:37 Peter said to Him, “Lord, why can I not follow You now? I will lay down my life for Your sake.” Was this statement any more or less real than the sermon he preached. Is there any difference between a preacher and a carnival barker?

Lk 22:34 Jesus answered him, “Will you lay down your life for My sake? “I tell you, Peter, before the rooster crows today, you will deny several times that you know me.”

54 Then they seized him(Jesus) and led him away, bringing him into the high priest’s house, and Peter was following at a distance. 55 And when they had kindled a fire in the middle of the courtyard and sat down together, Peter sat down among them.

56 Then a servant girl, seeing him as he sat in the light and looking closely at him, said, “This man also was with him.”

57 But he denied it, saying, “Woman, I do not know him.”

58 And a little later someone else saw him and said, “You also are one of them.”

But Peter said, “Man, I am not.”

59 And after an interval of about an hour still another insisted, saying, “Certainly this man also was with him, for he too is a Galilean.”

60 But Peter said, “Man, I do not know what you are talking about.” And immediately, while he was still speaking, the rooster crowed.

The supernatural is still farfetched because we can see science and physics understood, by physical laws that can be replicated and proved over and over, the supernatural cannot. If you cannot understand some event then we must determine to find out what aspect of the natural is causing something we cannot immediately explain but it’s all there at the fingertips of knowledge.

You can’t simply say that the natural now understood was really the supernatural before we understood, that would be a religionist trick trying to bring science into its fold. Religion can’t get away with hijacking the natural and claim it was supernatural before it was known….Oh they may try as you have just shown by saying the supernatural is not so farfetched (compared to what we are discovering in science, which is why I think you said it)

Bob, your post #99 is well said. I respect your current view although I disagree wholeheartedly with you.

The concept of jettisoning God because of science is nonsensical to me and I can’t see any reason why one must take such a hard stance against God and the supernatural simply because of our current knowledge of the natural world. I have spoke to this many times before and still contend that science merely describes the natural world, it is not the Creator of it. In the end, we all have to come to grips with how life and the universe came into existence and I will continue to contend that from a scientific point of view, there absolutely cannot be a scientific explanation. I say this not because of dogmatic beliefs, but actually I came to the same conclusions in my mind long before I knew little or anything about God.

As for religions being useful for moral teaching, I think you rightly figured out that this is not the aim of Christianity at least, although I would argue that most if not all other religions are work-based/morality based. Christianity is unique in that it’s message is one of a free offer of life beyond the here and now and answers the ultimate dilemma of death in a spiritual and practical sense because of the resurrection of Jesus. No other religion has this offer on the table for mankind but rather the religions of the world place people on a performance treadmill as they try to reach their god and climb the hill of apparent spirituality. This is true spiritual bondage much worse and deceiving than the secular religion of today.

As for the writings themselves, I cannot speak for other religions, but as for the Old and New Testaments of the bible, there is a great body of scriptures filled with supernatural content mixed with historical content. We need to remember that these writings are merely highlights or summaries of events that took place over very long periods of time. I think many make the mistake of reading the bible as if it covers a short time span, like reading a novel. If you take into account that the biblical narrative covers a period of over 6000 or so years of human history, it puts a better perspective on the supernatural elements in it. That is, we would not expect to find such historical details written in a book of mythology. To me, this rings of something that is true, authentic and trustworthy using my common human skills of recognizing a fairy tale from something genuine. So I don’t expect to see a miracle or a supernatural event every day, because it never happened that way before. Miracles are rare, otherwise they would not be called miracles. A person can go through their whole life and never witness any personal miracle, but based on our relatively short life span compared to how long the earth has been here and the frequency of miracles recorded in the bible, this is not unreasonable.

what pray tell are you talking about when you say “………there is a great body of scriptures filled with supernatural content……./ Can you give me samples of this supernatural content?

AND MIRACLES? Miracles are composed of two things: either simply unexplained events; and to ancient man almost everything in the world was unexplainable or a magic trick…for example the pillar of cloud by day and the pillar of light by night that guided the exodus as it went day and night to escape the Egyptians is easily explained…and magic tricks as miracles:
———————————————————
EXODUS 7:8-9 Then God spoke to Moses and Aaron. He said, “When Pharaoh speaks to you and says, ‘Prove yourselves. Perform a miracle,’ then tell Aaron, ‘Take your staff and throw it down in front of Pharaoh: It will turn into a snake.’”

10 Moses and Aaron went to Pharaoh and did what God commanded. Aaron threw his staff down in front of Pharaoh and his servants, and it turned into a snake.

11-12 Pharaoh called in his wise men and sorcerers. The magicians of Egypt did the same thing by their incantations: each man threw down his staff and they all turned into snakes.
———————————————————
And remember Naz: God never spoke directly to Moses and Aaron or anybody else; whenever the references to God “saying” or “directing” or “declaring” whatever, all these utterances came from a so-called prophet, a religious leader, like a priest or minister, who was the village spokesperson for God as the Village Preacher (either self-appointed or schooled in Divinity school; AKA the Sons of the Prophets Schools – see footnote) these Preachers determined what God “says” or “directs” or “utters” so it was simply another another man speaking to Moses and Aaron, on behalf of God as he heard in a dream or imagined in his mind. So Naz, please don’t imagine that your supernatural God actually talked to anybody at all!

****footnote****:
The schools of the prophets were established by the prophet Samuel. The first mention of the “sons of the prophets”, AS ALL THE YOUNG MEN EDUCATED THAT WAY WERE CALLED, we find it in 1 Samuel 10, when Saul is anointed as king. (1 Samuel 10:5) In the days of Samuel there were two schools of the prophets, one in Ramah, where the prophet Samuel lived, and one in Kiryat Yearim, where it was the ark of the covenant. Later on some more schools of the prophets were established in Bethel (2 Kings 2:3), Jericho (2 Regi 2:15), Gilgal (2 Kings 4:38) etc.

I often wonder why people refuse a challenge when I ask for examples of the supernatural or the miracles none of which cannot be easily explained except to a supernatural mind that refuses to learn a thing call flexibility. Are you afraid of logic that is beyond a reasonable doubt and so Jesus came to mind once AGAIN AND HE SAID THIS ABOUT THAT:

Matt 13:11-15 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given.

12 For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath.

13 Therefore speak I to them in parables:…….In them the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled: ‘You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving. 15 For this people’s heart has grown callous; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts, and turn, and I would heal them.’ ….”

In other words:

11-15 He replied, “You’ve been given insight into God’s kingdom. You know how it works. Not everybody has this gift, this insight; it hasn’t been given to them. Whenever someone has a ready heart for this, the insights and understandings flow freely. But if there is no readiness, any trace of receptivity soon disappears. That’s why I tell stories: to create readiness, to nudge the people toward receptive insight. In their present state they can stare till doomsday and not see it, listen till they’re blue in the face and not get it. I don’t want Isaiah’s forecast repeated all over again:

Your ears are open but you don’t hear a thing.
Your eyes are awake but you don’t see a thing.
The people are blockheads!
They stick their fingers in their ears
so they won’t have to listen;
They screw their eyes shut
so they won’t have to look,
so they won’t have to deal with me face-to-face
and let me heal them.
Did you not even read Exodus about the snake miracle? Did you not read how the Exodus was guided by a pillar of light by night and a pillar of cloud by day., Did you not read about the feeding of the multitudes, the burning bush; Did you not read about when Moses was about 40 years old, he saw an Egyptian beating a Hebrew slave, and he was so outraged that he struck and killed the Egyptian (Ex. 2:11-12). But when both his fellow Hebrews and the Pharaoh condemned him for this action, Moses was forced to flee from Egypt (Ex. 2:14-15).

He fled to Midian, where he met and married Zipporah, the daughter of a Midianite priest (Ex. 2:16-21).

What about the resurrection of many who appeared to many and why did Peter not even mention it in his sermon you noted earlier:

Although people may have doubted that Jesus raised a few people while he was still alive and although “some doubted” Jesus’ own resurrection (Matt. 28:17), who could fail to have been impressed by many risen saints appearing to many? How also could Peter have neglected to mention them in his Jerusalem speech a mere fifty days after they “appeared to many in the holy city”? Surely their appearance must have been foremost on everyone’s mind. So why didn’t Paul mention such a thing in his letters, our earliest sources? Why did the women who visited the “empty tomb” on Sunday morning not take notice that many other tombs were likewise open? Why didn’t the visitors to Jesus’ tomb mention that they had met or seen many raised saints in that vicinity, meeting them on the way to Jesus’ tomb or on the way back to town? Why did the apostles disbelieve the first reports of Jesus’ resurrection when a mass exit from the tombs had accompanied his resurrection? Why didn’t Matthew know how many raised saints there were? Why couldn’t he name a single one or a single person to whom they had appeared? How did Matthew know that these saints had come out of their tombs? That would be more than anyone had seen in the case of Jesus’ resurrection.

Let’s look at the implications of some of these questions. According to the literal Greek in Matthew 27:50-53, the tombs were opened and the saints were “raised” at the instant of Jesus’ death, but they entered the city over a day later! Apparently, neither Joseph of Arimathea nor Nicodemus, while burying Jesus (John. 19:38-40), chanced to marvel at all the opened graves and the raised saints in them waiting patiently for Sunday morning. The women in Matthew’s account were likewise oblivious to the many graves lying opened by the earthquake and the saints supposedly just beginning to leave the cemeery for town the same morning the women were arriving. And the other gospels were silent on this major miracle involving many! Paul was silent on this matter in 1 Corinthians 15, where he discussed the resurrection at great length! Peter was silent on the matter in his speech recorded in Acts 2, delivered a mere 50 days after the many saints entered the city and appeared to many! Surely the “gift of tongues” would pale in miraculous significance compared to the “raising of the many who appeared to many.” Yet Peter said nothing about the latter. We are not talking about just the apostles, like Peter, being witnesses to just the resurrection of Jesus; we are talking about many people who had witnessed many saints being raised, and some of these “many” witnesses were surely present in the audience Peter preached to that morning. So why would he have had to speak at length to convince them that the resurrection of one man had happened? Having witnessed the resurrection of many, they would have readily accepted the claim that one man had been resurrected.

And what about the raised saints themselves? Wouldn’t they have made terrific evangelists? But we don’t read anything about that; instead, we have silence. We admit that to argue from silence is not equivalent to disproof; however, it is not the silence of extrabiblical sources that makes us doubt this account of multiple resurrections. It is the silence of other biblical authors that is generating our doubt.

You can’t yet go down to Home Depot and buy a StarTrek replicator. You’ll need a few billion dollars and a CERN particle accelerator to convert bosons (energy) into fermions (matter). Einstein was right, energy and matter are interchangeable but it will be few years before you can turn on a flashlight and make a double cheese burger.

I likewise disagree with your world view, but I also respect your right to believe as you do. I understand your position on the origin of life and the origin of the universe and don’t object (at this time) to your desire to define the answer to those questions by attributing them to the work of God, what scientists refer to as the God hypothesis. I have repeatedly said on this website that science has not, yet, come up with satisfying explanations for the origins of life and matter. However, I doubt that my fellow scientists will suddenly see the light (pun intended), abandon the scientific method and accept “God did it” as a valid solution to these questions. Nor should they, as doing so terminates scientific inquiry.

Also, I don’t doubt the validity of the historical facts mentioned in the Bible, nor do I doubt that Jesus actually lived and died 2000 years ago. What I do doubt is the validity of miracles, no matter how rare they are. Frank is right on that issue; belief in miracles is required to have belief in God, something I have a hard time agreeing to, due on my scientific education. But there is also the issue of the divinity of Jesus. Jesus was, first and foremost, a Jew. Every Jew who has lived for the past 2000 years and the vast majority of those who were alive at the time of Jesus’ ministry rejected the subsequent Christian theological claim that Jesus was the Old Testament messiah. Unless there is other corroborating evidence, I defer to their judgment on that issue. Which leaves us with Jesus’ claims of his own divinity as told in the Gospel of John. On that issue, Leo is right, those claims are not repeated in Matthew, Mark and Luke. If you strip away the claim that Jesus was the messiah, nearly the entire theological basis for Christianity and the claim that Jesus is the one true God is the writings in John and Paul’s subsequent ministry.

I am inclined to defer to the scholarship of Bart Ehrman on the validity of John, consistent with my preference for the scholarship of those who can actually read and understand 2000 year old Greek. But, I admit I haven’t read the other side. Any suggestions Frank? Any scholarly texts you can recommend on the authorship and validity of the litany of John? Preferably those that don’t rely on Old Testament prophets to make the case.

I have mentioned John’s Gospel before about this matter. At that time I concluded the following:

Much of my own understanding of the historical Jesus is actually taken from biblical scripture but researching scripture without the magic, miracle and myths of a supernatural mindset. I have discovered to my own satisfaction that most miracles are embellished narratives of common sense events which can easily be imagined and understood without the context of hocus pocus supernaturalism.

Within this framework for example the Gospels: Mark, Matthew and Luke almost exclusively notes Jesus reference to an Almighty Guide as “the Father” whereas John on the other hand almost exclusively refers to Jesus reference to an Almighty Guide as “God”. This was an important key in my research because it showed that John’s Gospel maintains the notion of an external supernatural entity while the other three open a different option of the Almighty Guide that Luke says in 17:21 the Father who occupies the Kingdom “within you”; thus, the Father of Jesus being “within you” while the God of John suggests an external entity.

With respect to this, John’s references are suspect as to the real Jesus as I see it but is used; I believe, primarily to illustrate the Church Dogma of Supernaturalism. This may be reflective of John’s reliance on the Old Testament notion of the Messiah or it may have been edited that way in Nicea in 325CE as a compromise to the two warring factions over Jesus Divinity. But using John in this way, the “God” external was connected to the other three Gospels which suggests the “Father within” as the “God”factor. Whether John or the Church desired effect was to make the two, “God” and the “Father” appear interchangeable so as not to lose the sense of supernaturalism that supports dogmatic, unexplained miracles thereby maintaining the allure of unprovable belief and faith, the foundations of religion, and they have done that quite successfully until now.

I have researched the bible and Jesus and religion since I was 12. I am much older now but have in recent years written extensively from the research material but have not always documented the sources from which I gleaned. I thought someday to put my reflections, observations and comments from lots of sources into Chapter and Verse, book form. From the earliest days of the Nicene Convention in 325CE.

In tracing the origin of the Bible, one is led to AD 325.

If books conformed to Church Dogma consensus they stayed, if not they were burned, rewritten, embellished and otherwise edited to conform. Especially the all the writings of Arius and his followers, the Arians.

Jesus was not a Jewish teacher of the Jewish Law; Jesus was not a believer in the supernatural external God but was more or less a closeted a-theist teacher of the only Law there is for humanity: The Law of Love: of Life, of Self and of Neighbor without neglecting the source which he claimed dwelled within one’s humanity. But that went against the grain of all religious teachings including Judaism.

Jesus may have been a Jew by birth but he was an Atheist by choice; that’s why they tried to kill him. He did not try to “fix” religion because religion was as unfixable then as it is unfixable today; the entire religious Laws were corrupt because the Status Quo did not understand how to practice the Law of Humanity. They practiced the punitive Mosaic Law of Revenge, eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth and that Law was not fixable; Jesus therefore replaced the Mosaic Law by demonstrating the correct fulfillment of Universal Laws: Forgiveness, Compassion and Love. It is the reason Jesus refused to carry out the Law by stoning the woman caught in the act of adultery. He shamed the elders of the Law into leaving the woman alone. It is no small wonder then that they wanted to kill this common sense person who went against every grain of religious adherence and ritualism the religious were corrupted by and in so doing rubbed the religious in the wrong way and exposed their wrath because he showed them they were leading wasted lives by telling people they were doing God a favor by killing non believers, gays and regular sinners. They too were poignantly made aware of their own humanity by his no nonsense logic that utterly distressed them to the quick.

BRIEF SUMMARY BY LIVESCIENCE:

When Constantine became the first Christian leader of the Roman Empire in the 4th century, his vast territory was populated by a hodgepodge of beliefs and religions.

Within his own young religion, there was also dissent, with one major question threatening to cleave the popular cult — as it was at the time — into warring factions: Was Jesus divine, and how?

It’s hard to imagine riots in the streets, pamphlet wars and vicious rhetoric spawned by such a question, but that was the nature of things in A.D. 325, when Constantine was forced to take action to quell the controversy.

That summer, 318 bishops from across the empire were invited to the Turkish town of Nicea, where Constantine had a vacation house, in an attempt to find common ground on what historians now refer to as the Arian Controversy. It was the first ever worldwide gathering of the Church.

The Christianity we know today is a result of what those men agreed upon over that sticky month, including the timing of the religion’s most important holiday, Easter, which celebrates Jesus rising from the dead.

Christianity was young and still working out the kinks when Constantine took power over the Roman Empire in A.D. 306. Christian doctrine at the time was muddled and inconsistent, especially when it came to the central question of Jesus’ relationship to God.

Jesus was as eternally divine as the Father, said one camp led by the Archbishop Alexander of Alexandria. Another group, named the Arians after their leader Arius the preacher, saw Jesus as a remarkable leader, but inferior to the Father and lacking in absolute divinity.

Supporters on both sides scrawled graffiti on town walls in defiance while bishops from across the empire entered into a war of words as the controversy simmered to a head in 324.

Fearing unrest in his otherwise peaceful territory, Constantine summoned the bishops to his lake house in Nicea on June 19, 325.

In a savvy move that would put today’s shrewd politicians to shame, the compromise proffered by Constantine was vague, but blandly pleasing: Jesus and God were of the same “substance,” he suggested, without delving too much into the nature of that relationship. A majority of the bishops agreed on the compromise and voted to pass the language into doctrine.

Their statement of compromise, which would come to be known as “The Nicene Creed,” formed the basis for Christian ideology. The bishops also used the Council of Nicea to set in stone some church rules that needed clarification, and those canons were the reference point after which all future laws were modeled.

As a final order of business, the bishops decided upon a date for the holiest of Christian celebrations, Easter, which was being observed at different times around the empire. Previously linked with the timing of Passover, the council settled on a moveable day that would never coincide again with the Jewish holiday — the first Sunday after the first full moon on or after the vernal equinox.

And what happened to the dissenters? All the bishops save five declared themselves ready to subscribe to this formula, convinced that it contained the ancient faith of the Apostolic Church. The opponents were soon reduced to two, Theonas of Marmarica and Secundus of Ptolemais, who were exiled and anathematized. Arius and his writings were also branded with anathema (a formal curse by a pope or a council of the Church, excommunicating a person or denouncing a doctrine.) his books were cast into the fire, and he was exiled to Illyria.

I have mentioned John’s Gospel before about this matter previously. At that time I concluded the following:

Much of my own understanding of the historical Jesus is actually taken from biblical scripture but researching scripture I read it without a belief in the magic, miracle and myth of a supernatural mindset. I have discovered to my own satisfaction that most miracles are embellished narratives of common sense events which can easily be thought up and understood without the context of hocus pocus poof poof of supernaturalism.

Within this framework for example the Gospels: Mark, Matthew and Luke almost exclusively notes Jesus reference to an Almighty Guide as “the Father” whereas John on the other hand almost exclusively refers to Jesus reference to an Almighty Guide as “God”. This was an important key in my research because it showed that John’s Gospel maintains the notion of an external supernatural entity while the other three open a different option of the Almighty Guide that Luke says in 17:21 the Father who occupies the Kingdom “within you”; thus, the Father of Jesus being “within you” while the God of John suggests an external entity.

With respect to this, John’s references are suspect as to the real Jesus as I see it but is used; I believe, primarily to illustrate the Church Dogma of Supernaturalism. This may be reflective of John’s reliance on the Old Testament notion of the Messiah or it may have been edited that way in Nicea in 325CE as a compromise to the two warring factions over Jesus Divinity. But using John in this way, the “God” external was connected to the other three Gospels which suggests the “Father within” as the “God” factor. Whether John or the Church, the desired effect made the two, “God” and the “Father” appear interchangeable so as not to lose the sense of supernaturalism that supports dogmatic, unexplained miracles thereby maintaining the allure of unprovable belief and faith, the foundation pillars of religion. And they have done that quite successfully until now.

I have researched the bible, Jesus and religion since I was 12.

In tracing the origin of the Bible, one is led to AD 325.

If books conformed to Church Dogma with a consensus vote they stayed, if not they were burned, rewritten, embellished and otherwise edited or revised to conform. Especially made for the fire were all the writings of Arius and his followers, the Arians, one of the two factions at loggerheads.

Jesus was not a Jewish teacher of the Jewish Law; Jesus was not a believer in the supernatural external God but was more or less a closeted a-theist teacher of the only Law there is for humanity: The Law of Love: of Life, of Self and of Neighbor without neglecting the source which he claimed dwelled within one’s humanity. But that went against the grain of all religious teachings including Judaism.

Jesus may have been a Jew by birth but he was an Atheist by choice; that’s why they tried to kill him. He did not try to “fix” religion because religion was as unfixable then as it is unfixable today; the entire religious Laws were corrupt because the Status Quo did not understand how to practice the Law of Humanity. They practiced the punitive Mosaic Law of Revenge, eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth and that Law was not fixable; Jesus therefore replaced the Mosaic Law by demonstrating the correct fulfillment of The Universal Law: Forgiveness, Compassion and Love.

The Universal Law was the reason Jesus refused to carry out the Mosaic Law of stoning the woman caught in the act of adultery. He shamed the elders of the Law into leaving the woman alone. It is no small wonder then that they wanted to kill this common sense guy who went against every grain of religious adherence and ritualism the religious were corrupted by and in so doing rubbed the religious in the wrong way. This exposed religious wrath because he exposed their wasted lives of hypocrisy by telling people they were doing God a favor killing non believers, gays and regular sinners who disobeyed them. They too were poignantly made aware of their own humanity by Jesus’ no nonsense logic but which utterly distressed them to the quick.

I do not find anything in my characterization of Jesus distressful in the least.

Leo

BRIEF SUMMARY BY LIVESCIENCE:

When Constantine became the first Christian leader of the Roman Empire in the 4th century, his vast territory was populated by a hodgepodge of beliefs and religions.

Within his own young religion, there was also dissent, with one major question threatening to cleave the popular cult — as it was at the time — into warring factions: Was Jesus divine, and how?

It’s hard to imagine riots in the streets, pamphlet wars and vicious rhetoric spawned by such a question, but that was the nature of things in A.D. 325, when Constantine was forced to take action to quell the controversy.

That summer, 318 bishops from across the empire were invited to the Turkish town of Nicea, where Constantine had a vacation house, in an attempt to find common ground on what historians now refer to as the Arian Controversy. It was the first ever worldwide gathering of the Church.

The Christianity we know today is a result of what those men agreed upon over that sticky month, including the timing of the religion’s most important holiday, Easter, which celebrates Jesus rising from the dead.

Christianity was young and still working out the kinks when Constantine took power over the Roman Empire in A.D. 306. Christian doctrine at the time was muddled and inconsistent, especially when it came to the central question of Jesus’ relationship to God.

Jesus was as eternally divine as the Father, said one camp led by the Archbishop Alexander of Alexandria. Another group, named the Arians after their leader Arius the preacher, saw Jesus as a remarkable leader, but inferior to the Father and lacking in absolute divinity.

Supporters on both sides scrawled graffiti on town walls in defiance while bishops from across the empire entered into a war of words as the controversy simmered to a head in 324.

Fearing unrest in his otherwise peaceful territory, Constantine summoned the bishops to his lake house in Nicea on June 19, 325.

In a savvy move that would put today’s shrewd politicians to shame, the compromise proffered by Constantine was vague, but blandly pleasing: Jesus and God were of the same “substance,” he suggested, without delving too much into the nature of that relationship. A majority of the bishops agreed on the compromise and voted to pass the language into doctrine.

Their statement of compromise, which would come to be known as “The Nicene Creed,” formed the basis for Christian ideology. The bishops also used the Council of Nicea to set in stone some church rules that needed clarification, and those canons were the reference point after which all future laws were modeled.

As a final order of business, the bishops decided upon a date for the holiest of Christian celebrations, Easter, which was being observed at different times around the empire. Previously linked with the timing of Passover, the council settled on a moveable day that would never coincide again with the Jewish holiday — the first Sunday after the first full moon on or after the vernal equinox.

And what happened to the dissenters? All the bishops save five declared themselves ready to subscribe to this formula, convinced that it contained the ancient faith of the Apostolic Church. The opponents were soon reduced to two, Theonas of Marmarica and Secundus of Ptolemais, who were exiled and anathematized. Arius and his writings were also branded with anathema (a formal curse by a pope or a council of the Church, excommunicating a person or denouncing a doctrine.) his books were cast into the fire, and he was exiled to Illyria.

If I may be so bold to summarize, the historical narrative as I understand it goes as follows – Jesus’ prediction of the imminent collapse of the Roman Empire, leading to his becoming the Son of Man, to sit beside the Father and rule over a 1000 year peace (as describe first by Mark and then by Matthew and Luke); the fracturing of the Christian faith into multiple sects, each with their own sacred texts, when the Roman Empire didn’t collapse; the change in the scriptural narrative to Jesus becoming the divine Son of God to rule over a future, everlasting peace; the evolution of Christian dogma at the 4th century councils at Nicea and Constantinople to resolve issues of the divinity of first Jesus and then the Holy Spirit and finally Jerome’s assembly of the Vulgate Bible to formalize a body of approved scriptures consistent with the revised, agreed upon dogma. Is that a fair summary?

I follow Naz’ logic about how Christianity offers the above said everlasting peace through belief in the Redemption compared to the peace on Earth offerings of Eastern religions based on personal actions. What I don’t comprehend (still) is how any of that justifies the claim that Jesus is the one true God, if one accepts the logic that the evolution of Christian dogma was the product of a 400 year argument amongst Bishops and theologians, each with differing beliefs, each in their own way trying to adapt their beliefs due to Jesus’ incorrect prediction of the collapse of the Roman Empire and the 1000 year peace that would follow. Where are the flaws in my logic? Naz? Frank? Anyone?

Bob, your last 2 posts are excellent in explaining your current position and view. I respect your honesty and appreciate that you clarified your thoughts on where you stand on all this. By doing so it makes it much easier to discuss these things with you without trying to guess your disposition.

Regarding “Christian dogma” I don’t think it is accurate to say it was an evolution of a 400 year argument. I am not an expert at textual criticism but the most fundamental doctrines of the resurrection and the divinity of Christ are at the core of the Christian message and can be found in the most earliest writings. These have never changed.

Instead of trying to regurgitate another persons work I can give you 2 sources that you can glean from.

One is from Dr. Gary Habermas. He specializes in the resurrection and historicity of Jesus.

For my own thoughts as Jesus as the one true God, let me say that Jesus is God manifest or existing as a human being. Jason has many good articles on this topic on this site that explains this in great detail.

Christians believe that the One True God took on another existence as the Son of God. Some argue there is a Trinity and so on, but these are just speculations and arguments that lead to division. The bottom line is Christians believe Jesus is divine. So in essence Jesus is God. This is difficult to understand but suffice to say the Jews of Jesus’ day understood what it meant when Jesus claimed to be the Son of God, for when He said this they accused Him of blasphemy and tried to stone Him.

John 10:33 The Jews answered him, “It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God.”

You have lost me here. Jesus did not predict the imminent collapse of the Roman Empire nor did he predict he would become the son of man; what he predicted was the imminent collapse of the world system of corruption followed by the Son of Man in his day….that could be anybody, not necessarily Jesus because there arises Sons of Man in many generations that oversee the transition from one era to another and it was a future Son of Man who would set up the rule of that transitional time period which uses the metaphorical number 1000 but that does not mean exactly 1000 more or less but a substantial time or a little time, it is symbolic like 40 days and 40 nights(fasting or raining) or meditating, 3 days or or 3 nights or the numbers 3 1/2, 7, 666 all symbolic numbers. When you begin to take everything literally you lose the essence of the design, the plan, the leaven of heaven that will form the transition over a period of time as the leaven in 3 measures of flour…… You can find in other scriptural references about the thousand year option….including the most obvious in Revelation speaking of the time when the era of the old earthly scheme of things will pass away as the old heavenly scheme of things will pass away as the new earth and new heaven transition. like the transition of communication, telephone, radio, television, black and white to color, mono sound to sterophonic, tubes to transitors, 8-track. vinyl to 8-track to cassette to cd’s dvd’s, analog to digital so on and so on………..Humanity too will transition just as Abraham predicted when he looked down the corridors of time and knew a champion would arise, Jesus looked down the corridors of time and could see that in the future days the Son of Man….”in his day”

Luke 17:24 For the Son of Man in his day will be like the lightning…..

Luke 17:30 “It will be just like this on the day the Son of Man is revealed.

The expression ‘the Son of man in his day’ occurs nowhere else in the New Testament.

So don’t return us to mud, saying,
“Back to where you came from!”
Patience! You’ve got all the time in the world—whether
a thousand years or a day, it’s all the same to you.
Are we no more to you than a wispy dream,
no more than a blade of grass
That springs up gloriously with the rising sun
and is cut down without a second thought?
Your anger is far and away too much for us;
we’re at the end of our rope.
You keep track of all our sins; every misdeed
since we were children is entered in your books.
All we can remember is that frown on your face.
Is that all we’re ever going to get?
We live for seventy years or so
(with luck we might make it to eighty),
And what do we have to show for it? Trouble.
Toil and trouble and a marker in the graveyard.
Who can make sense of such rage,
such anger against the very ones who fear you?
(Psalm 90:3-11)

“But do not let this one fact escape your notice, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years like one day.”
(2 Peter 3:8).

Get out of literal moindset for a few moments and read scripture this way:

Matt 24:3 Later as he was sitting on Mount Olives, his disciples approached and asked him, “Tell us, when are these things going to happen? What will be the sign of your coming, that the time’s up?”

4-8 Jesus said, “Watch out for doomsday deceivers. Many leaders are going to show up with forged identities, claiming, ‘I am Christ, the Messiah.’ They will deceive a lot of people. When reports come in of wars and rumored wars, keep your head and don’t panic. This is routine history; this is no sign of the end. Nation will fight nation and ruler fight ruler, over and over. Famines and earthquakes will occur in various places. This is nothing compared to what is coming.

9-10 “They are going to throw you to the wolves and kill you, everyone hating you because you carry my name. And then, going from bad to worse, it will be dog-eat-dog, everyone at each other’s throat, everyone hating each other.

11-12 “In the confusion, lying preachers will come forward and deceive a lot of people. For many others, the overwhelming spread of evil will do them in—nothing left of their love but a mound of ashes.

13-14 “Staying with it—that’s what God requires. Stay with it to the end. You won’t be sorry, and you’ll be saved. All during this time, the good news—the Message of the kingdom—will be preached all over the world, a witness staked out in every country. And then the end will come.

Jesus saw himself as the Son of Man because he himself knew that he was “Everyman” and he also knew that in another generation there will also arise Sons of Man who themselves will also view themselves as the Son of Man…they will see themselves as Jesus saw himself…”Everyman” and Jesus perfectly illustrates this essence a little further on in

Matt 25:31-45:
31-33 “When he finally arrives, blazing in beauty and all his angels with him, the Son of Man will take his place on his glorious throne. Then all the nations will be arranged before him and he will sort the people out, much as a shepherd sorts out sheep and goats, putting sheep to his right and goats to his left.

34-36 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Enter, you who are blessed by my Father! Take what’s coming to you in this kingdom. It’s been ready for you since the world’s foundation. And here’s why:

I was hungry and you fed me,
I was thirsty and you gave me a drink,
I was homeless and you gave me a room,
I was shivering and you gave me clothes,
I was sick and you stopped to visit,
I was in prison and you came to me.’
37-40 “Then those ‘sheep’ are going to say, ‘Master, what are you talking about? When did we ever see you hungry and feed you, thirsty and give you a drink? And when did we ever see you sick or in prison and come to you?’ Then the King will say, ‘I’m telling the solemn truth: Whenever you did one of these things to someone overlooked or ignored, that was me—you did it to me.’

41-43 “Then he will turn to the ‘goats,’ the ones on his left, and say, ‘Get out, worthless goats! You’re good for nothing but the fires of hell. And why? Because—

I was hungry and you gave me no meal,
I was thirsty and you gave me no drink,
I was homeless and you gave me no bed,
I was shivering and you gave me no clothes,
Sick and in prison, and you never visited.’

44 “Then those ‘goats’ are going to say, ‘Master, what are you talking about? When did we ever see you hungry or thirsty or homeless or shivering or sick or in prison and didn’t help?’

45 “He will answer them, ‘I’m telling the solemn truth: Whenever you failed to do one of these things to someone who was being overlooked or ignored, that was me—you failed to do it to me.’

Jesus / Sons of Man are see themselves as “Everyman” and therefore they do to others as they would want other to do for them…in a humanity visited with the final leaven…..”Everybody” will become “Everyman” and thus will the sheep and the goats will separate. And that is no idle boast:

THE ONLY JESUS TO BELIEVE IN!
The life of Jesus covers the whole spectrum of human experience. The characters he encountered range from tyrants, murderers, bullies, thieves, jealous schemers, liars and assassins to noble kings, tender lovers, doting parents, roistering drunks, swaggering soldiers, philosophers, gravediggers and country bumpkins. How could one man, who lived all his life within a small area of the Middle East, have achieved such an encyclopedic knowledge of mankind?

The answer of course is by looking inside himself. In his own head and heart he found every possible trait of character and twist of emotion. His dialogue rings true because Jesus knew that he himself was Everyman. He had only to consult his own soul to imagine how any character would react in a given situation because he—-as a human being—- was also a microcosm of the whole human race.

Since each of us is a human being, each possesses within himself the whole potential range of emotions, urges, fears, anxieties, appetites, physical and emotional needs, instinctual drives and reactions common to all. This is not just idle philosophizing, it’s a fact of key importance to your own personal life and to your understanding of Jesus, the Son of Man, IN HIS DAY!

I don’t follow your argument that belief in an Almighty Creator terminates scientific inquiry. I think any rational person (including many well-educated scientists) will acknowledge that given the fact laws exist that govern the operation of the universe he will also recognize the necessity for the Law Giver who instituted & maintains those laws. Doesn’t information come from an intelligent mind? Or does order come out of chaos? Indeed he’ll earnestly seek to determine how those laws function. If he’s truly curious he might even seek to learn why he’s here in the first place, what purpose he serves in being here and where he’ll go when his time in this life terminates. He may even be motivated enough to search for an eternal universal truth that lies within the reach of his grasp. Isn’t that a core objective of scientific inquiry, i.e., the search for truth? Afterall, if belief in the Eternal One True Living Creator God inspired the likes of Nicolai Copernicus, Galileo, Louis Pasteur & Sir Isaac Newton then shouldn’t that tell us something about the nature of true scientists?

Dr. Stern’s comprehensive treatment of the entire New Testament firmly establishes the Jewish foundational basis laid down by Christ Himself which upholds the spirit of salvation from Genesis 49:18 through John 4:22 and beyond.

Lastly, I’ll leave you with the testimony of two witnesses. And if you know anything about Biblical authority you’ll know that it takes at least two viable witnesses to establish a matter [Deuteronomy 19:15].

Here’s an E-book I’ve come upon that takes up the issue of the seeming dichotomy in how Jesus/Yahshua viewed His Jewish brethren and was viewed by them in the Gospel of John. Was it a relationship characterized by enmity or empathy? Discover for yourself.

I stand corrected. I looked up your suggested references and double checked Ehrman’s writings. He has changed his mind about the divinity of Jesus as depicted in Matthew, Mark and Luke, possibly in response to the negative feedback he got when his book How Jesus Became God was published:

The last 2 paragraphs summarize his current thinking on the subject but the logic is not black and white, it is more nuanced than that. His argument looks to me to be very similar to the differences of opinion that were in play on the divinity of Jesus between the various sects of Christianity during the second and third centuries, differences that were not resolved until the Council of Nicea and the generation of the Nicean Creed.

I like coming to this website because the back and forth discussions help me better define my personal beliefs. It’s good to be firm about what one believes, but I also like to understand why I believe what I believe and try to understand why others believe as they do. A good history on the Nicean Creed can be found in Philip Jenkins’ book Jesus Wars. It documents not just what and why but also who, where, when and how of the politics, people and differing Christian theologies of the time (“Wars” is a bit of a misnomer. The wars were mostly written and verbal and only occasionally physical). A good read, in my opinion, on how Christian theology of the divinity of Jesus got to where it is today.

Bob, I didn’t know he changed his mind about the divinity of Jesus. Good find. Dr. Habermas often mentions Bart Ehrman’s writings and I think he respects his work from what I understand.

You are correct, we must understand why we believe what we believe otherwise it is pointless. There has always been various sects of Christianity and some that you cannot even really call Christianity such as the Gnostics of John’s day which are directly addressed in 1 John of the bible. These Gnostics denied that Jesus came in the flesh and John warned about these false teachers so that their teaching would be avoided. These same Gnostics denied that they were culpable for sins as well which was another part of their belief system that John addressed in 1 John.

I think the council of Nicea and the establishment of creeds was a way to consolidate and solidify the true nature of Christianity given all of these spurious beliefs about Christ and what His appearance into human history really meant. I think for the most part these councils did a good job in trying to sift out erroneous beliefs and spurious writings that tried to make their way into the mainstream. For example, I have read some of the excluded books that never made the canon and it is clear that they don’t fit and belong in the canon just by their content and lack of proper authorship. The study of church history is interesting and you will find that the doctrines and creeds of the early church and early councils get more and more watered down as you go forward in time culminating in the gross apostasy of the Catholic Church which did a great job in perverting the scriptures and giving the church a bad name until this day. As a former Catholic, I see very little resemblance of true biblical Christianity in the doctrines and practices of the Catholic church.

Here’s an elucidating presentation by Dr. Michael Heiser which exposes the mythology of gnosticism and its attempted corrupting influence on Biblical Scripture from the first millennium BC even to this very day:

I converted the PDFs and downloaded them to my Kindle. Thanks. The library is searching for Stern’s book. I hope it isn’t in Hebrew when it arrives.

To the question of the God hypothesis being a dead end, at the risk of being off topic, I’ll keep my explanation short (probably my fault for being off topic in the first place). The accumulation of scientific knowledge is a process of asking questions, formulating a hypothesis, testing the validity of the idea and then moving on to the next hypothesis in order to expand the knowledge base. When you accept the God hypothesis as an explanation, there isn’t a next hypothesis. If God did it, why look any further? There is a more complex answer to your question but Jason might delete my post if I elaborate. We’re about due for another post from Jason on intelligent design, or Leibniz’ contingency argument, or the atheism of scientists. I’ll go into it further then. I hope you read this before Jason deletes it.

“I think the council of Nicea and the establishment of creeds was a way to consolidate and solidify the true nature of Christianity…………………perhaps the true nature of Christianity but certainly not the true nature of Jesus by any means.”

Isn’t this just another way of saying that when two factions disagree, the majority consensus rules? rather than arriving at the true nature of something? The more bums on the pews do not necessarily mean that they are supporting the true nature of where and why they sit there.

Jesus himself is the perfect example of why true nature is not described by consensus………. Who agreed with Jesus when he started his campaign? practically nobody. Who agrees with me on the true nature of Jesus, practically nobody. So you see true nature is not determined by a democratic process.

Individuals who do not follow the crowd are the individuals who tend to take this world in different directions, who change the world…..Archimedes, Wright brothers, Bell, Edison, Franklin, Tesla, Leo (heh heh) Da Vinci, Babbage, Galileo(heh heh), Tim Berners Lee oh?( heh heh), Watt, Nobel, Gutenberg, Jobs, Fleming……..

Do you suppose the radiation that passes through the body is merely matter traveling at the square of the speed of light? And if so does that matter necessarily need to be so small or do you think large objects such as marbles or even planets are capable of traveling at the square of the speed of light?

I’m exploring the difference between the natural and the supernatural in terms of modern science and what these scientists are proposing. Don’t get hung up on the creation account in Genesis, what does a parent tell their child when they first ask – where do baby’s come from?

As per a previous post: the different Gospels are different sides of Jesus Christ focusing on His humanity and divinity. As I’ve previously said: if Jesus Christ is not divine I would not follow Him. I’d take the portions of the New Testament that helped me (most would pre-date Him anyway) and discard the rest. Again, Jesus assures me and others, He will fix things only a supernatural Jesus can. It’s not about a reward it’s about the world we were supposed to live in. If I die and won’t be able to partake in that world why should I care?

Actually, RC perverting the Gospel message in the early years and till present, is the biggest problem for Christians spreading the good news. And this is not a no true Scotsman fallacy, just ask a RC if “Protty Jesus” (CMTV term not mine) is the same as their RC Jesus. RC Jesus is Tammuz not Jesus Christ anyway. RC are the same as all the other man made religions that can trace their roots back to Babylon. Just different names and some changes over time due to language and separation.

A young girl being a virgin is not supernatural. A first century virgin becoming pregnant without “knowing a man” would have been considered supernatural. A 21st century virgin becoming pregnant by artificial insemination or invitro fertilization may not be considered natural by everyone but it’s definitely not a miracle. But if you use the term natural to mean not miraculous, then a virgin having a baby without knowing a man is natural.

If theists don’t use hot button words like: God, creation, supernatural, miracle, sin, angel, heaven, hell, (for the record I believe it’s life or death not heaven, hell or purgatory) etc… can we have a discussion with atheists about these topics under different names?

Because atheists are talking about different dimensions, advanced beings/extraterrestrials, black holes, energy to matter, rodent like animal mutating into all land mammals by chance (why not gene splicing instead?) etc… This would seem very “supernatural” not so long ago. So is it what theists are talking about really supernatural? Or just the natural we can not comprehend at this time.

Some say knowledge (not wisdom) is doubling every 13 months. My father was born in 1925 and is still a live. He went from man in the moon, to man on the moon and beyond. What will this world be like if I live to his age? It’s interesting as knowledge increases my faith in God does not diminish. Because if we can do what we can do, the bible miracles don’t seem so miraculous. Why can’t Mary be the first surrogate mother? After all, it’s only natural.

Your argument is not convincing. How many moms and dads on the planet, past, present or future, would buy the story from their 13 year old daughter that an angel got her pregnant? My guess is only a handful would be gullible enough to believe that. Everyone else is more likely to suspect that high school kid named Joe, who had been hanging around the house after school while mom and dad were still at work, had something to do with it.

In reality, this is a morality argument, a worthwhile effort by a group of Greek speaking and writing converts to Christianity, education wise the 1%ers of their time, to enhance the divinity of Jesus in order to promote the adherence to his teachings. Nothing wrong with that. Everyone on the planet would be better off if everyone lived by the personal moral code of the Ten Commandments (or the Rig Vedas or the Five Precepts, etc., etc.) and the civil moral code preached by the Jesus and the prophets (turn the other cheek, do unto others, etc., etc.). And if that isn’t sufficient, then there is the added inducement of the promise of eternal peace if you behave yourself and eternal damnation if you don’t.

I’m all for moral behavior. I’m just not convinced I need to believe in the supernatural in order to achieve it.

Bob, your are 100% correct, you don’t need God to behave morally. That’s not what the gospel is about. Unfortunately religion has twisted the gospel message of new life in Christ into a means to improve our morality and behavior. This is law based theology which is prevalent in Catholic, Protestant and Evangelical churches everywhere. Bad behavior will not damn a soul to Hell, but unbelief will. This is the so called “unpardonable sin”. The reason it is unpardonable is because the person who refuses the offer of Jesus Christ refuses the only way in which to obtain forgiveness of sins and eternal life. As the scripture says we all stand condemned already, not because of our behavior but because we are “in Adam” and not “in Christ”. It’s a matter of “spiritual geography” and not behavior.
Once a person is in Christ, sin and death have no power over you because Jesus took your place at the cross. So when we are saved, grace, not law or a moral code, teaches us to live righteously, not because of the fear of punishment or judgment, but because it doesn’t fit with our new identify as a child of God. There are those (even on this blog) that will try to tell you that a saved person can sin his way back to Hell, but that is not logical because Jesus died for all your sins, past present and future, once and for all and sin has no power over you even if you commit a sin. The gospel would not be good news if we could blow it ! As a matter of fact, this type of gospel is a curse. Imagine that after having received eternal salvation, that it is now up to you to make sure you don’t lose it by your behavior. What a miserable life, one that I have lived and one that many Christians still live in vain. It would be better to be blissfully ignorant as an unbeliever than rather to live as a Christian in fear of losing your salvation.

“The accumulation of scientific knowledge is a process of asking questions, formulating a hypothesis, testing the validity of the idea and then moving on to the next hypothesis in order to expand the knowledge base. When you accept the God hypothesis as an explanation, there isn’t a next hypothesis. If God did it, why look any further?”

Bob, on your comment above, it doesn’t matter if God did it because science is the discovery of what God did anyway !

It also depends on what topic of science you are referring to. For example, if we are trying to figure out how the universe was created, then yes, it is futile to try an come up with theories and experiments with ponds of goo to determine how life could have started if God just did it. Time would be better spent to come up with cures to diseases or improving quality of life etc…. In my opinion, the idea of a natural first cause to the physical universe is a logically flawed concept.

There is plenty of science still to do to discover and understand how our physical world operates, and that is all good and needful. So my point is, we can have God and science and do not need to discard either.

The problem I have with Genesis is that it is a depiction of evolution that took place over a 6 day period but if a day is like a thousand years, it could also be that a day is the same as a billion years. Genesis could be more appropriately called genesis as conceived by the imagination; in this case the imagination of Moses who is reputed to be the author. So “In the beginning”, your guess is as good as mine only I do not believe there was “a beginning” or the “big bang” hypothesis.

You can list all the so-called miracles of the bible and I can give a natural explanation for them that requires thoughtful meditation whereas the supernatural requires no thought, just blind belief.

Regarding a conversation about sin, angel, heaven, hell,…..sin is what others say you are doing that they are offended by, they don’t like; or, that goes outside the culture or religion they were brought up to obey as a guide for behavior………

angel is a person who comes and rescues you or provides for an unfulfilled need you have or does something that is good and touches the emotion…I think the person who intervened when Abraham, in a state of intoxication or otherwise deluded hallucination was about to kill his son, that person was an angel………first responders are current angels in most civilized countries either organized responders or impromptu responders of individuals as the occasion arises, angels do not occupy the heads of pins…………

heaven is the ideal state of imagination where you can project all the good you imagine; hell is the state of affairs where all the evil and disgusting behavior in mankind resides—both can be the source for either life sustaining events or death sustaining events, acting on the imagination can rejoice others or revile others and you will know them by the fruits of their words and deeds….also known as the Cain and Abel effect.

THE AXIOM OF THE WOLVES:
The human world is populated by CAINS and ABELS:
CAINS are bullies who want to impose a universal morality which is why it has always attracted the kind of person who thinks other people’s private lives are their business; they are fraught with anger, envy, sorrow, regret, greed, arrogance, self-pity, guilt, resentment, inferiority, lies, false pride, fear, superiority, and ego; all there is of evil is available to the one who is available to all there is of evil and that is as evil as it gets for one with evil intent. A mindset of death, deceit and destruction .

ABELS are like lambs of children; endowed with playful love for themselves and their neighbor, full of joy, peace, love, hope, serenity, humility, kindness, benevolence, empathy, generosity, truth, happiness and compassion; all there is of good is available to the one who is available to all there is of good. And that is as good as it gets for one with good intent! A mindset of life, honor and hospitality construction.

I must tell you that you are wrong about the sin of blasphemy and you need to know the truth, accept it or reject it, but you need to know what it means.

You are talking about Jesus when you talk about the unforgivable sin but the blasphemy against the spirit has nothing to do with belief or unbelief in Jesus; it has only got to do with something YOU have, not something you don’t have. Jesus was not talking about believing in himself here or unbelief in himself; he gave the parable about why the unforgivable sin is unforgivable and what constitutes going against the holy spirit guide within you. It has nothing to do with unbelief and Jesus is not talking about himself.

Very few religious people understand what the nature of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit really means. First of all the Holy Spirit resides inside everybody; this is not something outside the human experience, the spirit resides within. Think of it this way. As a child you fall and scrape your knee so you learn not to fall or you learn how to avoid a fall that will injure you. We feel the heat as a child from the stove or a match or the fire of a lamp or a candle but as a young inexperienced child we do not understand what burn means and we don’t hesitate to reach out to touch the fire.

Suddenly, WOW, we feel the heat and anyone who has ever been around a new born baby knows what happens as the child touches something that hurts them for the first time. Yes they will cry loudly over that event but what happens is that the child’s brain is also seared by the memory of the fire or the heat and there it will remain as a memory throughout the lifetime of the person, into adulthood as a guide for discernment. This is the bundle of experiences through sensory perception placed for our protection in that wonderful part of the brain we call memory.

What we call Ghost is really The Ghost of Memory. Holy, being another word for Good, the spirit within is actually our memory, the Good Spirit, the Good Memory, the Holy Ghost, honed by the bundle of experiences we go through and learn to discern good from the bad. We deem it good because it is our internal savior by which experience, understanding and knowledge gives us that bundle of experiences so we learn to avoid the bad and choose the good, we avoid the pain of fire for instance.

Jesus referred to this inside force as the Self Witness, The Father. Memory is really our internal guide that will remember our bad experiences and good experiences alike so we can discern the difference and choose the one that is “GOOD”, the right one. The Internal Guide, the Companion within, sees everything we do in secret because our memory records every one of our behaviors and experiences associated with our behavior. That my friend, is the Holy Ghost; AKA, Good Gosh.

Whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; indeed, cannot be forgiven because we go against our very own self; we go against our very own house and we are guilty of the eternal sin which is also being guilty of “internal sin”.

That is, “if you go against your natural memory, knowingly and decide to take the chance anyway, that is the peril you put yourself in because you are going against what the internal spirit has recorded in your memory for your protection.

Those who go directly against the natural barriers…… do so at their own peril because they willingly give in to the behavior which memory already knows about and warns us the danger of doing something that could seriously harm or even cause our death and therefore cannot be forgiven, for if you relinquish your personal guide (guardian angel) and abandon your memory savior..your own Spirit, you risk losing it all; you may get away with it once or twice maybe even three or more times but is the risk of death against your own self protection, worth it? what a chance you take.

Abandoning the spirit that is part of you, there to protect you and secure you and remind you of the dangers and then, going against the guide; i.e., gut instinct or intuition even though you may not directly remember, your guide will give you the vibes of danger, the feelings of uneasiness….pay attention because if you don’t, this can allow forces to be brought upon you with utter destruction; without remedy! Then, there can be no forgiveness since forgiveness is part of the spirit you rejected so if you go against the spirit within you, willingly, if you go against your internal warning; you go against forgiveness itself; how then, can you have it and don’t obey it at the same time……..You cannot. Going against the internal spirit then, is what we call blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.

The reason this is so is explained in the parable Jesus used to describe what happens when you go against the internal spirit, your own guide and he gave the example of “…….if a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. 25 And if a house is divided against itself, that house cannot stand.”

It simply means that if your mind is divided against itself; that is, when you go against yourself, your kingdom, your house, it cannot stand and for that reason the blasphemy, against the Holy Spirit which you are born with for your well being, is going against your own internal spirit, the guide you have from birth to protect you, that is what you are rejecting and that is why it cannot stand and will not stand and will be your eventual undoing.

“Listen to this carefully. if you persist in your slanders against God’s Holy Spirit, you are sawing off the branch on which you’re sitting, severing by your own perversity all connection with the One whose beneficiary you are.”

Throw that away and you lose your mind, your house, your humanity, your essence, your life. Unforgiveness is the result of rejecting forgiveness. Spiritless. A house divided against itself.

Now just take a moment and reread the parable of Jesus with this new perception. He replied because the religious scholars accused Jesus of having Satan in himself and for that reason was able to cast out evil spirits:

Mark 3:22 And the scribes which came down from Jerusalem said, He hath Beelzebub, and by the prince of the devils casteth he out devils.

23 And he called them unto him, and said unto them in parables, How can Satan cast out Satan?

24 And if a kingdom be divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand.

25 And if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand.

26 And if Satan rise up against himself, and be divided, he cannot stand, but hath an end.

27 No man can enter into a strong man’s house, and spoil his goods, except he will first bind the strong man; and then he will spoil his house.

28 Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme:

29 But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation.

30 Because they said, He hath an unclean spirit.

The “Satan against Satan” is he parallel parable of the “Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit” within: A constantly squabbling family disintegrates. If Satan were fighting Satan, there soon wouldn’t be any Satan left. And Blasphemy against the Spirit has the same effect as the “Satan’s divided House” parable he used to explain it.

Leo, I totally disagree with you because everything you said is based on false premises. Everybody does not have the Holy Spirit living within, they have their own human spirit only. Those that are in Christ have the Holy Spirit within and are permanently unified with Christ. You receive the Spirit of Christ when you believe in Christ and are born again as Jesus said.

Rom 8:9 You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him.
Rom 8:10 But if Christ is in you, although the body is dead because of sin, the Spirit is life because of righteousness.
Rom 8:11 If the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, he who raised Christ Jesus from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit who dwells in you.

To finish my thought Leo….ironically your theology is a blasphemy against the Holy Spirit because you deny the divinity and identity of Jesus Christ as the unique Son of God. For this there is no forgiveness but only a fearful expectation of judgment that will consume the adversaries of God.

What you are telling me is what people after Jesus are reputed to have written, like Paul…So forget Paul for a moment and follow what Jesus said.

Don’t you know that when they stoned Stephen it was at the feet of Paul that the false witnesses against Stephen laid their clothes until they stoned Stephen dead? If that is not acquiescence by Paul then I don’t know what you would call it about the one you keep quoting as though he is the be all, end all when it comes to describing anything about Jesus? Are you kidding? Do you so quickly forget certain parts of the bible for convenience sake because of Paul’s Pharisaical Philosophy. You’re wasting your mind chasing Paul, using him as your crutch.

“……..But then some men from the meeting place whose membership was made up of freed slaves, Cyrenians, Alexandrians, and some others from Cilicia and Asia, went up against him(Stephen) trying to argue him down. But they were no match for his wisdom and spirit when he spoke.

11 So in secret they bribed men to lie: “We heard him cursing Moses and God.”

12-14 That stirred up the people, the religious leaders, and religion scholars. They grabbed Stephen and took him before the High Council. They put forward their bribed witnesses to testify:

“This man talks nonstop against this Holy Place and God’s Law. We even heard him say that Jesus of Nazareth would tear this place down and throw out all the customs Moses gave us.”

And your hero Paul was there amongst the group who cursed and railed and approved the stoning of Stephen.

Acts 7:1 Then the Chief Priest said, “What do you have to say for yourself?”

Acts 7:57-58 Yelling and hissing, the mob drowned him out. Now in full stampede, they dragged him out of town and pelted him with rocks. The ringleaders took off their coats and asked a young man named Saul to watch them.”

Acts 8:1 Saul was one of the witnesses, and he agreed completely with the killing of Stephen. A great wave of persecution began that day, sweeping over the church in Jerusalem; and all the believers except the apostles were scattered through the regions of Judea and Samaria.

Please don’t ever reference Paul to tell me what Jesus is all about; Paul is your hero, Jesus is mine.

If the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit did not exist before Jesus than why did Jesus bring it up in parable as already existing? You mean to tell me it did not apply to Abraham, the patriarchs and all the prophets including Moses? And to all the people that ever lived on earth before Jesus? And to Jesus himself who said proclaimed that the Kingdom of God is within you?

You unfortunately are full of Paul and everybody else from Acts onward and and backward, peppered with Pharisee Dogma and a sprinkling of Christian Dogmatic interpretation. You are not full of Jesus, that’s why you only quote your hero Paul about what and who Jesus was. “Divine” to you means theologian, clergyman, clergywoman, member of the clergy, churchman, churchwoman, cleric, minister, man/woman of the cloth, preacher, priest. You know nothing about Jesus and neither did Paul.

When Jesus spoke that parable he never knew Paul other than possibly that Paul was one of the murderers on behalf of the Pharisees and possibility one of the Pharisees that Jesus was forced to avoid when the Jews were out to kill him. As Paul himself admits:

Acts 21:39 Paul said, “I am a Jew from Tarsus, in Cilicia, a citizen of no mean city; and I implore you, permit me to speak to the people.”

Acts 22:4-5 “I went after anyone connected with this ‘Way,’ went at them hammer and tongs, ready to kill for God. I rounded up men and women right and left and had them thrown in prison. You can ask the Chief Priest or anyone in the High Council to verify this; they all knew me well. Then I went off to our brothers in Damascus, armed with official documents authorizing me to hunt down the followers of Jesus there, arrest them, and bring them back to Jerusalem for sentencing.”

How can you incessantly quote somebody who was a murderer of the early Christians…that’s why Jesus said: “You hypocrites! Isaiah prophesied correctly about you: ‘These people honor Me with their lips, but their hearts are far from Me. They worship Me in vain; they teach as doctrine the precepts of men.’”…
men like Paul and Naz and Frank and 119 ministries. He could just as well have said “……..in ignorance do they honor me……..” except that they willfully dishonored him, refusing the knowledge they are given…………

And in fact you are completely discounting Jesus parable, his very words which I described to you and everything he said, Yet you rebut Jesus words with the words of as a follower of Paul not Jesus so please don ‘t try to shove Pauline philosophy down the throat and then claim you are following Jesus. That is caca del toro of the icky kind to say the least.

Here Naz, take these words back because they belong to you.

“You are in serious error….once again.”

However I will not do a disservice to the Holy Spirit with the accusation you so unashamedly shove my way: “………..your theology is a blasphemy against the Holy Spirit……….”

I cannot judge your motives in the same way. When you profess such a profound ignorance of Jesus, I know it can’t be your fault entirely because the words you repeat merely follow the dogma of the divine authority of the clerics you quote who are equally as blind as the proselytes they have made; how can it be otherwise, I must admit.

This fulfills scripture that Jesus spoke of:
“Woe to you, scribes, religion scholars and Pharisees! Frauds! you travel around on sea and land to make one proselyte; and when he becomes one, you make him into a replica of yourselves, double-damned, twice as much a son of hell as yourselves.”

Leo, you poor soul, you must do your due diligence and keep reading before you accuse of me following Paul….. touche !

Paul’s story is a witness of the power of the Gospel and what it can do !

You could be the modern day Saul yourself……wouldn’t that be the kicker !

Gal 1:11 For I would have you know, brothers, that the gospel that was preached by me is not man’s gospel.
Gal 1:12 For I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ.
Gal 1:13 For you have heard of my former life in Judaism, how I persecuted the church of God violently and tried to destroy it.
Gal 1:14 And I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my own age among my people, so extremely zealous was I for the traditions of my fathers.
Gal 1:15 But when he who had set me apart before I was born, and who called me by his grace,
Gal 1:16 was pleased to reveal his Son to me, in order that I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately consult with anyone;
Gal 1:17 nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me, but I went away into Arabia, and returned again to Damascus.
Gal 1:18 Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas and remained with him fifteen days.
Gal 1:19 But I saw none of the other apostles except James the Lord’s brother.
Gal 1:20 (In what I am writing to you, before God, I do not lie!)
Gal 1:21 Then I went into the regions of Syria and Cilicia.
Gal 1:22 And I was still unknown in person to the churches of Judea that are in Christ.
Gal 1:23 They only were hearing it said, “He who used to persecute us is now preaching the faith he once tried to destroy.”
Gal 1:24 And they glorified God because of me.

Leo, as far the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit goes, I know I extrapolated a little in my take on it, however, you must consider the context of the passage was that they were attributing the power of God to Satan.

Mat 12:22 Then a demon-oppressed man who was blind and mute was brought to him, and he healed him, so that the man spoke and saw.
Mat 12:23 And all the people were amazed, and said, “Can this be the Son of David?”
Mat 12:24 But when the Pharisees heard it, they said, “It is only by Beelzebul, the prince of demons, that this man casts out demons.”

Jesus healed this man of blindness and muteness, go figure Leo, could this be a miracle or did Jesus rub some of that Moses snake oil on his forehead to cure him. Of maybe Jesus pulled out his special eye cleanser formula which he made from the river, since after all the person wasn’t really blind but only had something in his eye but the people around him were too stupid and naive to notice the difference. What a bunch of knuckleheads, right ?

I digress…. back to the blasphemy, the context states that blasphemy of the Holy Spirit occurs when the power of God is misrepresented, in this case the power of God was attributed to Satan. The key here is a misrepresentation or a wrong identification. Why is that a big deal ? Because these are the types of things that can lead people astray. Remember what Jesus asked the disciples, “Who do men say that I am ?” It’s all a question of identity. We see in John how the Jews constantly challenged Jesus on His identity to the point of trying to push Him off a cliff. The identity of Jesus is at the core of the issue here. If you get this wrong, the dominoes fall and you end up with Leo-ology’s and all sorts of crazy ideas.
So by calling Jesus a common man and stripping Him of His identity as the Son of God and Savior of mankind, you blaspheme the Holy Spirit because the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of Christ and Christ is one with the Father, therefore Jesus is the I AM, the Almighty God !

Rev 1:17 When I saw him, I fell at his feet as though dead. But he laid his right hand on me, saying, “Fear not, I am the first and the last,
Rev 1:18 and the living one. I died, and behold I am alive forevermore, and I have the keys of Death and Hades.

My copy of Stern’s book is in English so rest easy I’m sure yours will be too.

Let’s take the example of a quintessential scientist, Sir Isaac Newton. Now here was a man whose curiosity about nature and it’s ways of working proved insatiable. He navigated successfully from challenge to challenge in fields from celestial mechanics to optics to advanced mathematics making groundbreaking scientific discoveries and innovations as he went. Throughout his investigations he maintained his belief/trust in The God of the Bible, The Lord of the Universe, i.e., The Pantocrator. Rather than being an impediment his faith in the Almighty proved to be a driving force in his search for understanding because it held before him infinite possibilities to be explored coming from an Eternal Omnipotent Creator.

As Naz has said, “There is plenty of science still to do to discover and understand how our physical world operates, and that is all good and needful. So my point is, we can have God and science and do not need to discard either.”

In your post dtd. May 31, 2016 you wrote, “But there is also the issue of the divinity of Jesus. Jesus was, first and foremost, a Jew. Every Jew who has lived for the past 2000 years and the vast majority of those who were alive at the time of Jesus’ ministry rejected the subsequent theological claim that Jesus was the Old Testament messiah. Unless there is other corroborating evidence, I defer to their judgment on that issue.”

Understanding Jesus’ analogous metaphor comparing Himself to bread and wine in relation to the New Covenant will clarify the matter:

I am not talking about any miracle…and the blasphemy against the holy spirit has nothing to do with misrepresenting the power of God to Satan, you fail to understand Jesus or his parables; you will remain obtuse and that’s the way it is.

Jesus quoted Isaiah and tried to tell you way back when and yet you still cannot grasp it…but you don’t believe he was talking about you, no Naz, not you, because you think you have it all down pat…. But you don’t. You can agree with the Nicea Council ’til you’re blue in the face but you are still wrong now just as they were wrong in 325CE…they also believed right through the centuries when their dogma convicted Galileo of heresy and put him under house arrest as an old man until he passed away…such is the ego of people who cannot see further than the dogma they have been indoctrinated with.

“Whoever has will be given more, and he will have an abundance. Whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken away from him. This is why I speak to them in parables: ‘Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand.’ In them the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled: ‘You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving.…

My aversion for the use of the God hypothesis is scientific research has more to do with the backroom political efforts of the Discovery Institute to change how the scientific method is taught in schools rather than the religiosity of scientists. The distinctions are subtle but are off topic to Jesus being the one true God. There will be ample opportunity in the future to get into the details; Jason posts something 3-4 times a year that reflects a misunderstanding of the application of the scientific method.

The God Hypothesis advocates attempting to embrace science is so obviously pretentious they cannot help but reveal their hand. Believers claim that God and Science not only mutually exist together but are so compatible that the God Hypothesis must be taught in Science classes just as other Scientific Theories. Enter the arena with such statements as

“………So my point is, we can have God and science and do not need to discard either.”; conjunction, so it will be shown that

“…………it is futile to try an come up with theories and experiments with ponds of goo to determine how life could have started if God just did it……..”

revealing the true intention, the real objective of the God Hypothesis advocates in the science classroom: so that Science can lend credence to believers if they can just manage to hijack science education as God’s relevant domain….. but of course!

I call it the “Foot in the Back Door syndrome” by any means possible but without anything but a blind belief that science can never prove God because God proves science, so don’t even bother with knowledge based theories with research, with observation, with peer review.

Bob Mason clearly states the end result of allowing the God Hypothesis in the classroom as science:

“When you accept the God hypothesis as an explanation, there isn’t a next hypothesis. If God did it, why look any further?”

EXACTLY WHAT the statement

“…………it is futile to try an come up with theories and experiments with ponds of goo to determine how life could have started if God just did it……..” proved by the blind believer!

Newton trusted Locke enough to send him a very long letter—entitled “Two Notable Corruptions of Scripture”—to present him with the evidence for Newton’s view that the original version of Christianity was corrupted beginning in the 4th century by the introduction of the doctrine of the Trinity (Newton 1959–, vol. 3: 83–129).

The Second Corruption of Scripture as noted by Newton’s letter title, I have not found yet. If you or perhaps Bob have, please share it.

I’ve yet to see the letter by Newton you reference. If I locate it myself I will post a link to it if possible at the appointed time. I have read that Newton was a deep scholar of Biblical Scripture who was fascinated with Daniel’s Seventy Week Prophecy as recorded in Daniel 9. Perhaps this was his second concern? Regarding the assertion concerning the Trinity as having been introduced into Christianity in the 4th century as a corrupting influence; there exists ample, competent, scholarly work to refute that claim. Some of which you’ll find in posts # 69 & #125 above. Again, a topic for further exploration at the appointed time.

It seems to me a peculiar irony that Newton, a truly powerful intellect, misunderstood on a fundamental level the two things in his life that he devoted his most fervent efforts studying. He not only suffered a critical failure in grasping the fundamental Multi-Personal nature of The Godhead & The Deity of Christ/Messiah even though their roots go far back into Biblical Scripture & History but he also failed to realize an essential characteristic of the nature of the universe as well. He was convinced the universe was eternal.

Jesus in the Hebrew Scriptures? — Wasn’t He supposed to be in the New Testament only? — Well, of course He is featured in the prophecies which foretell His first and second coming, and this book has a detailed look at some of them.

But did you know that, throughout the Hebrew narrative, Jesus was also there in person? Did you know that He was seen not just by some of the well known heroes of faith, but that He met and conversed also with some of the less prominent Jewish figures?

Let us turn to the Hebrew Scriptures and see what they teach about Jesus. Some of the topics are:

* God — absolute or composite unity?

* “El Shaddai” — when men saw God face to face

* The Angel of the Covenant — preparations for the coming of the Messiah

* Immanuel — the prophecy about the virgin birth of the Messiah

* The Messiah-King to come, according to the Hebrew Scriptures — something for us to look forward to

* “The Messiah cut off” — Did you know that Daniel foretold the precise time of the first coming of the Messiah to earth?

* The Servant of the Lord — the suffering Messiah — He did what He did for you and me!

But why should one bother learning all those details out of a book that is nearly 3000 years old? — Because Jesus says: “If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also” (John 14:7). There is nothing more important in the world than knowing Jesus — and knowing Him well — because “he who does not have the Son of God does not have life” (1 John 5:12). We want to know God, and we want to have life!

The Bible is the only book in which God Himself reveals His attributes, His will and His truth to us. It is also the only book whose writers can say authoritatively, “Thus says the Lord,” their authority being confirmed by God, as all their words and prophecies are being fulfilled. Let us open our Bibles together and let God — the Author of that ancient book — speak to us.

Meanwhile, this video series provides competent in-depth scholarship concerning the Person of Christ/Messiah and the role Jesus/Yahshua fulfills beginning in the Old Testament and finishing in the NT.: (The audio of this video clears from any distortion @ about 7 minutes in.)

The 00261 is repeated in the 00262 which is a shorter version of 00261 but contain essentially the repeated paragraphs of part 1.

What I have been able to glean from Newtons letter is that the two corruptions lies first in 1 John 5:7; and second in 1 Timothy 3:16…..”God was manifest in the flesh……” was changed from the original; i.e., instead of the version used in the first 5 centuries which simply stated “….And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness:….which was made manifest in the flesh…..” in the verse: 3:16 was changed to accommodate the “trinity” notation which was translated into the phrase “these three are one….” And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh,…………..”, also in some translations as “….He was revealed in the flesh…..”

This was the second corruption Newton claimed, it being a “change” of the scripture.

The first corruption Newton noted was an addition to the scripture that was possibly transferred into the text translations because it was a notation in the margins of the original texts made on one original manuscripts used for translation purposes and he states that this is how the margin note of “trinity” creeped into the translations as the phrase…”and these three are one” and in the following verse 8 “and these three agree in one”, for the term “trinity” is found nowhere in the bible.

1 John 5:7-8, 7 For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: The addition of the trinity was thusly add-ons ………………..”and these three are one”.

8 And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: ………………”and these three agree in one”.

Newton also wrote about the notorious

In summation of the corruption by the interpretation of the margin notation “trinity”:

These passages in Cyprian may receive further light by a like passage in Tertullian, from whence Cyprian seems to have borrowed them. For tis well known that Cyprian (tho otherwise a prudent man) was a great admirer of Tertullians writings & read them frequently, calling Tertullian his Master. The passage is this. a[59] The connexion of the Father in the Son & of the Son in the Paraclete makes three cohering one from another, which three are one (one thing, not one person:) as it is said, I & the Father are one; denoting the unity of substance, not the singularity of number. Here you see Tertullian says not the father word & holy spirit as the text now has it, but the Father Son & Paraclete, nor cites any thing more of the text then these words; which three are one. Tho this his treatise against Praxeas be wholy spent in discoursing about the Trinity & all texts of scripture are cited to prove it, & this text of Iohn as we now read it would have been one of the most obvious & apposite to have been cited at large, yet Tertullian could find no more words in it for his purpose then These three are one. These therefore he interprets – – These he interprets of the Trinity & enforces the interpretation by that other text I and the Father are one, as if the phrase was of the same importance in both places. So then this interpretation seems to have been invented by the Montanists for giving countenance to their Trinity. ffor Tertullian was a Montanist when he wrote this: & its most likely that so corrupt & forct an interpretation had it’s rise amongst a sect of men accustomed to make bold with the scriptures. Cyprian being used to it in his Master’s writings, it seems from thence to have dropt into his. For this may be gathered from the likeness between their citations. And by the disciples of these two great men it seems to have been propagated amongst those many Latines who (as Eucherius tells us) received it in the next age, understanding the Trinity by the spirit, water & blood. For how without the countenance of some such author an in terpretation so corrupt & strained should come to be received in that age so generally, I do not understand.

Nor do I understand how any of those many who took the spirit water & blood for a type of the Trinity, or any man else who was ignorant of the testimony of the three in heaven (as the Churches in the times of the Arian controversy generally were) could understand him otherwise. And even Cyprian’s own words do plainly make for this interpretation. For he does not say, the Father, the Word & the Holy Ghost as ’tis now in the seventh verse, but the Father & Son & Holy Ghost as ’tis in Baptism, the place from whence they used at first to derive the Trinity. If it be pretended that the words cited by Cyprian are taken out of the seventh verse rather then out of the eighth because he reads not Hi tres in unum sunt but hi tres unum sunt I answer that the Latines generally read hi tres unum sunt as well in the eighth verse as in the seventh as you may see in the newly cited places of S. Austin & Facundus, & those of Ambrose, Pope Leo, Beda & Cassiodorus which follow, & in the present Vulgar Latine. So then the testimony of Cyprian respects the eighth, or at least is as applicable to that verse as to the seventh, & therefore is of no force for proving the truth of the seventh: but on the contrary for disproving it we have here the testimonies of Facundus, S. Austin, Eucherius & those many others whom Eucherius mentions. {For} if those of that age had met with it in their books they would never have understood the spirit the water & the blood to be the three persons of the Trinity in order to prove them one God.

So then the testimony of the three in heaven, which in the times of those controversies would have been in every bodies mouth had it been in their books, was wholy unknown to the Churches of those ages. All that they could find in their books was the testimony of the water the spirit & the blood. Will you now say that the testimony of the three in heaven was rased out of their books by the prevailing Arians? Yes truly those Arians were crafty Knaves that could conspire so cunningly & slyly all the world over at once (as at the word of Mithridates) in the latter end of the reign of the Emperor Constantius to get all men’s books into their hands & correct them without being perceived: Ay & Conjurers too, to do it without leaving any blot or chasm in the books, whereby the knavery might be suspected & discovered; & to wipe even the memory of it out of all men’s brains, so that neither Athanasius nor any body else could afterwards remember that they had ever seen it in their books before, & out of their own too so that when they turned to the consubstantial faith, as they generally did in the West soon after the death of Constantius, they could remember no more of it then any body else. Well then it was out of their books in Ierom’s age when he pretends it was in which is the point we were to prove; & when any body can shew that it was in before, it may be pertinent to consider that point also: but till then we are only to enquire how since it was out, it came into the copies now extant. For they that without proof accuse hereticks of corrupting books, & upon that pretense correct them at their pleasure without the authority of ancient manuscripts, (as some learned men in the fourth & fift Centuries used to do,) are ffalsaries by their own confession, & need no other confutation. And therefore if this reading was once out, we are bound in justice to beleive it was out from the beginning, unlesse the rasing of it out can be proved by some better argument then that of pretense & clamour.

This reminds me of the old adage “….who has the gold makes the rules….” extrapolated here to mean:

Who has the manuscripts makes the revisions, add-ons, deletions, omissions, edits, embellishments, interpretations and changes.

For no translations I can find now have the original phrase “Which was made manifest in the flesh” EXCEPT

1 Timothy 3:16 Douay-Rheims 1899 American Edition (DRA)

16 And evidently great is the mystery of godliness, which was manifested in the flesh,…”…..however the DRA also has the 1st corruption Newton notes in 1 John 5:7-8 using the add-on to describe the trinity “And these three are one.”

Belief in Christ does not necessarily mean one must hold strictly to the doctrine of the Trinity. The concept of the Trinity is one way in which Christians have tried to understand and express the divinity of Jesus. Without getting into a long theological debate here, it is debatable that God exists as 3 persons as the doctrine of the Trinity suggests. I personally do not hold to this doctrine strictly based on my study of this topic, but nonetheless I do agree that Jesus is fully divine and fully human. In the end this is what counts the most and whether you adhere to the Trinity or not is not an issue which should cause division among believers.

So to point out a couple of debatable passages about the Trinity doctrine does nothing against the backdrop of the entirety of the scriptures which affirms and proclaims the deity of Christ and His saving work.

Belief in Jesus Christ does not mean one must hold to the doctrine of the superstitious and the supernatural because Jesus Christ held to neither himself. In fact Jesus debunked divine intervention according to the precepts of men.

Do not be dismayed for believing in Jesus Christ that is not the Jesus Christ Christianity believes; Christianity has to vote on the nature of Jesus by majority to arrive at his humanity; true believers already know it. What’s with the nonsense of Jesus being fully divine and fully human; that’s one of the most antithetical statements religious insanity has devised. It shows the extent that dogma is willing to go to argue for and against something at the same time; it’s worse than Trumpism from “men of the cloth”.

God maintains His own Word by His own means. Not one shall fall to the ground or return to Him empty. He preserves and protects the truth of His message from hostile jamming & counterfeit “corruptions” by interlacing those doctrines He deems purposeful throughout the course of the entire Bible. “For He says, ‘Order on order, order on order, line on line, line on line, a little here, a little there.'” (Isaiah 28:10)

How shall I interpret the books and websites you referred me to? I get the prophesy part, that is an appeal to divine revelation, to the supernatural. Since the books and websites are authored and administered by Jews, should I interpret the rest of the discourse as midrash,or is there another option?

No you shouldn’t. Presupposition doesn’t mix with interpretative analysis & conclusion. My suggestion is to examine the specific material offered then exercise your own decision based upon your perception of what’s most effective use of your academic experience & motivation as to how to proceed for full understanding of what you’ve examined. Otherwise your putting the cart before the horse. But however you decide I’d urge you not to limit yourself to conventional strata.

To describe the rationale of being fully man and being fully god as being rational, is like saying that because the prophets of the Old Testament, who were self appointed messengers or school appointed messengers, that they too were themselves fully man and fully god.

Angels were described as surrogates of the prophets and by association, the essence of god in the prophet was the same essence in the surrogates and further that the surrogates were precursors of god himself so listen to them because Heshem is embodied in them.

The best one can expect of god is “good” and the best reflection of god in a man is when a man reflects good; this then can be, metaphorically speaking, fully god in that “good” capacity of man being fully human. It is not on y men of the cloth, the prophet, preacher or priest who reflects “good” but every human for all intents and purposes can express “good” or “god” on occasion.

But saying that when you talk to the prophet, the preacher and the priest you are actually talking to god himself; well, that is exactly how the Old Testament describes talking to the Lord or the Lord talking to them. So when Moses says he talked to god or god talked to him, what he really means is that he talked to the appointed man of the cloth; in other words, the prophet. The prophet (man of god) transferred the metaphysical to the physical pretending that god was in their midst through the prophet and everybody went along with that religious culture because theocratic governments were in vogue in that time period. The judiciary were the priests and bishops and surrogates answerable to the High Priest, god’s “man on earth”.

Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against unpleasant impulses by denying their existence in themselves, while attributing them to others. In religion this projection is used in the same way but expressing either negative or positive projections, while attributing those projections to god. God said this or god said that, the Lord spoke, the wrath of the Lord.

Clergy was indispensable in the Old and New Testament and still operates in some theocratic countries; Japan was a theocracy(Shintoism) until their defeat in the second world war, most countries in the middle east are theocracies several being theocracies via the monarchy rather than the clergy. Most of the world operated under theocratic dictates during BCE and continued for the first two millennia CE.

God’s will, so called, is revealed in the “holy” scriptures. The sacred book formulates the will of God and specifies what is to be given to the clergy. Clergy become parasites. “… All things of life are so ordered that the clergy is everywhere indispensable; at all the natural events of life, at birth, marriage, sickness, death……” Natural values become utterly valueless. The Clergy sanctifies and bestows all value. Disobedience to God (the clergy) is ‘sin.’ Subjection to God (the clergy) is redemption. Clergy use ‘sin’ to gain and hold power.

That was the Way of the World in BCE and you still follow the Ancient Minds from that era. Shrug off the Shackles of supernatural Shame instead of trying to justify and rationalize indefensible superstition. The coming of Jesus was the epoch that changed the Old Ways and ushered in a new era but you don’t want to give it up as Jesus commended you. Remember Jesus saying….”“You have heard that it was said to those of old,……………..”…………….But I tell you ………..”.

Conclusion: Listen to the man you claim to follow and throw out everything else you have been indoctrinated by.

Pope Urban II, 1095 CE made this deal that if you were to go and fight in the Holy Land, you would be forgiven all your past sins. A knight could sin as much as he liked and simply by going to the Holy Land he was given his passport to heaven and that was an extremely attractive deal. Combined with that he could win fame, he could win glory and he could come back with untold treasures and these were the things that drew knights by their tens of thousands to go on crusades.

Your High caliber Biblical exegesis is not R.C. Sproul’s expositing The Trinity; it is expositing language and its variance along with some philosophical definitions of the words of language:

The reality of the trinity is that the concept was not argued for or against from language academia or philosophical definitions; it was simple voted on based on yays and nays and the yays won the consensus by majority rule.

Of the roughly three hundred bishops in attendance at the Council of Nicea, only two bishops did not sign the Nicene Creed, which condemned Arianism. This majority was due, at least in part, to a penalty of exile or death for refusal to sign the Nicene Creed that was imposed by Emperor Constantine.

So it was not mere academia and philosophical debate that saw the Trinity Creed accepted or from a scribbled word “trinity” in the margin of a manuscript and the add-on in the bible of the corrupt phrase, “and these three are one.” in 1 John 5:7, but considerable weight was given to the penalty of exile or death. And what happened to the nays? Arius the leader and his followers; they were routed and exiled and all their writings and books were burned up in flames.

Arius’s most important work was “Thalia” (The Banquet, 323), a work comprising both prose and poetry, in which he defended his beliefs. The document was destroyed by the trinitarians and is no longer extant, and knowledge of most of Arius’s writings comes only from the works of his critics, who, in condemning him, revealed much information.

Arius was anathematised by the Council of Nicaea (324) and banished by the Roman Emperor Constantine I (325). But in the reaction after Nicaea, where Arius gained support from Clergy across all Europe especially in the east and at one point Arians outnumbered the trinitarians, he came into imperial favor. (and was recalled from exile) The emperor had ordered the Athanasians at Alexandria to receive him at communion when he suddenly died under suspicious circumstances immediately after having an audience with the Emperor at the imperial palace. Arians believed that Arius had been poisoned.

Leo, your attempt to regurgitate church history and all sorts of debates regarding the Trinity doctrine is irrelevant to the claim that Jesus is fully God and fully Man. Councils of men do not determine truth.

This is a revelation to be understood by those that exercise faith in Christ. Not only is it a revelation, but there is sensible logic involved in the fact that for Jesus to be the sacrifice for the sins of the world, He must therefore be sinless Himself. Since we know by reality that no man can be or has been sinless, Jesus must be divine and fully human in order to satisfy the requirements for a spotless lamb. Divine in that He is sinless and human in that He could die to be the propitiation for our sins.

Jesus is not an ordinary man as you paint Him to be, He is much much more. The Jesus you declare is a false Jesus and is anti-Christ. For we know the spirit of anti-Christ has been in the world since the time of the apostles.

You will only know these things when you open your heart of faith and stop resisting the Spirit.

1Pe 1:18 Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers;
1Pe 1:19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:
1Pe 1:20 Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,
1Pe 1:21 Who by him do believe in God, that raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory; that your faith and hope might be in God.

Luk 24:44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.
Luk 24:45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,
Luk 24:46 And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:
Luk 24:47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.
Luk 24:48 And ye are witnesses of these things.
Luk 24:49 And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high.

No, it is not irrelevant, because your idea of the trinity, the godhead, the concept of fully human and fully god is only based on what transpired at the Nicea Council so please don’t try to suggest that you have come up with this idea yourself; quite the contrary Naz, you have not come up with any ideas yourself; you are a pawn of the priests. A proselyte made twice as fit for hell as those who made you so. You have no ideas on your own, you are an idea-less.

Not only are you an idea-less you are clearly a juvenile when it comes to logic, when it comes to Jesus.

Tell me who do you think determines sin in this world? I can tell you it is the same as Jesus said in his time period but I bet you you do not know it unless I tell you……It is you and others who determine sin; otherwise how can you determine what is sin? How can you determine what sinlessness is? You cannot unless you can find it out from the words of Jesus but I think you are not that canny to perceive the words of Jesus, alas.

As for the religious men in Jesus time they said of Jesus he was full of sin and as for men today saying that Jesus is sinless, that again is still a determination made by men. You think Jesus was sinless and the men of Jesus day were as convinced as you are today, that Jesus was full of sin.

So who should I listen to, you, who think you know what sinlessness is, or the religious men of the time period of Jesus, who think they knew what sin was?

I listen to Jesus about who and what and why and how sin is determined in this world among the religious community of which you are clearly are one.

Now I will not tell you in this post what Jesus said about sin because I don’t want to contaminate the lumping everything I say about Jesus into your own narrative of which you are sure to taint.

But I ask you…… what did Jesus say about the way men decide sin?

Do you know? If you do then tell me what Jesus said about the way men determine sin.

When it comes to Jesus fulfilling scripture, do you know why that happened? I know you don’t so I’ll tell you how that came to pass.

You see we are past masters at procrastinating what needs to be done because you, like myself and the rest of the world, are all too content to sit around and extoll the words that the messiah is coming but prepared to do absolutely nothing about it except to yell that he’s coming. And so you wait and you wait and you wait while it never gets done because nobody has the gonads to be the champion the whole world is waiting to come.

And so as it is still today, everybody like yourself in particular and the religious community in general, are all waiting for the “Second Coming” just as everybody two thousand years ago sat around and waited for the “First Coming”. Well if the messiah is coming what is stopping him from arriving, after centuries and centuries of waiting and waiting? Why? Well simple. Nobody wants to take the bull by the horn and be what the coming “being” is to do when s/he does come.

Don’t fool yourself this is no different today than it was two thousand years ago.

Except for the Jesus factor. When Jesus was born he wasn’t born with a silver spoon in his mouth, he didn’t go to this university and the other; he didn’t hold an armful of resumes and diplomas and degrees from the Sons of the Prophets Divinity College. But what he discovered while growing up was that he was born with all the attributes of as everybody in humanity and all the attributes of deity, just like everybody else and the tools to use them to that end. And from that time forward, Jesus decided to be what nobody else was willing to be and willing to go through, to prove that the yearning of man down through the centuries needed somebody willing, ready and able to fulfill the role that was written about and rhapsodizing about: the great day of the Champion of Mankind……the Messiah!

So Jesus took it upon himself to be that character the sages and good people down through the ages wrote about, sang about and prayed about for centuries…..finally we’ve got a man on our hands, a real man….tired of waiting around for somebody else to be what he himself, like them, endowed with the tools to get the thing done but which nobody else was willing to do for centuries!

Now, in a parallel life to Jesus, was John who saw the same concept as Jesus about being who he wanted to be but John chose to be the person to announce, to herald, the coming messiah, Jesus, John’s cousin and quite possibly Jesus’ half brother. And so in a very public meeting Jesus went to John and received from John the Baptism to honor John’s commitment to his vocation and while John did not want to baptize Jesus because he declared the role that Jesus assumed for himself and accepted that the role Jesus ascended to, to be far more the worthy goal than John himself had undertaken. But when John tried to talk Jesus out of John’s low self-esteem of baptism ,Jesus declined to hear it and said no, we will do it and for all righteousness it shall be so done! And John capitulated to Jesus’ reasoning.

After that time, as some in the crowd said they heard rolling thunder and others said they heard the voice of God from heaven, Jesus went off into the desert to meditate for a period of time to devise the plan his campaign shold take, to proclaim the role Jesus decided must be taken now or people could be waiting for another thousand centuries before someone with the fortitude and guts to be what everybody else was waiting for to come: somebody to step up to plate.

After his meditation was sufficiently complete and the plan set, Jesus went to the synagogue, took the requested scroll of Isaiah that was handed to him and unrolling it he found the place he wanted to read. Jesus by the age of 30 was very well versed in the scriptures and had indeed read and studied the verses all of his life since he was twelve years of age and with acute understanding I hasten to add, (not like the scribes and the pharisees who manipulated the scriptures to suit their own version of what they thought and therefore wanted the spirit world to be like) and so Jesus read from that scroll the very words that announced that the Kingdom of Heaven was was being proclaimed as predicted by Isaiah some seven centuries before Jesus the Christ, was born.

“The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me,
Because He has anointed Me
To preach the gospel to the poor;
He has sent Me to heal the brokenhearted,
To proclaim liberty to the captives
And recovery of sight to the blind,
To set at liberty those who are oppressed;
To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord.”

And the people he spoke about as the poor, the brokenhearted, the captives, the blind, the oppressed, were not people outside the synagogue, those he spoke about were the people inside the church, the churchgoers, the religious who were as shackled by nonsense then, as they are shackled by nonsense now, the religious community as a whole…….they, were the poor, they, were the brokenhearted, they, were the captives, they, were the blind, the oppressed……..made that way by the precepts of men who put accolades ahead of justice, money before repentance, deceit before honor, lies before truth………..supernatural folly made profound by magic, before the reality of humanity and love and neighbors, virtue and kindness and charity; charmed by the nonsense of superstitious dogma that made men frightened to partake of all there was of good that was available to the man who made himself available to all there was of good, and so the religious community was placed in chains of bondage, beholding to the clergy divined by God, who spoke as God, who decreed as God and who killed for disobedience to clerical decrees declaring it was God dispensing his wrath upon those sinners who questioned the clerics!

That was the beginning of the Christ Clear Campaign to Clean out and Clean up Church!

For those of you who put so much emphasis and credence in Moses’ Genesis narrative, a comment posted by MarkAaronO.DelaTorre (@Unico30AD) taken from the Book Of Job is just so apropos, I could not let it pass without sharing.

(Posted on Stephen Hawking: God Could not Create the Universe Because There Was No Time for Him to Do So)

It’s a good question to ask Moses and all the believers using Genesis. So you’ve got a bible you study and you flatter yourself on your biblical scholarship. You derive from it your theological and philosophical propositions but you examine that book without any revelation of the one who authored it but Job should give you pause.

Why do you talk so much when you know so little? Job 38:2
How did I lay the foundation for the earth?
-Were you there? Job 38:4

I am willing to die on the Genesis hill if it will bring people to faith that God did create it somehow. I really don’t care how He did it, but the fact is that He did do it and there is no other reasonable explanation, if we all put our theories and beliefs aside for just a moment and just admit what we know deep down.

That God created the universe is not the end of the discussion, it’s just the beginning. What a wonderful and amazing world we live in. We should all thank Him for it instead of trying to find ways to discredit or explain Him away.

You’re an absolute font of drivel and disinformation (false information that is intended to mislead). Here’s the most important point concerning what Jesus/Yahshua ever said concerning sin: “Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for unless you believe that I am He, you will die in your sins.” (John 8:24) Understand the true meaning & significance of that statement.

Deconstructing the Jesus of your predilections | Confirming the historicity of the actual Biblical Yahshua of Nazareth:

Nothing you say about Genesis is fact; everything you say about it is fiction, either your fiction, dogmatic fiction or Moses fiction. That’s why you are always at a lost to describe the reality of scripture…..Scripture has no reality for you, it has only a fiction in your imagination, duped into believing……..like Moses throwing down his staff as a magic trick to prove his God was the true god…..Give me a break….!

“The good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth what is good; and the evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth what is evil for his mouth speaks from that which fills his heart. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.” (Luke 6:45, 12:34) “He has done mighty deeds with His arm; He has scattered those who were proud in the thoughts of their heart.” (Luke 1:51)

I was away for the last few days, I just got caught up and I’ll briefly respond.

Regarding morality – Naz said it very well. I agree you do not have to be a theist to be “moral.” I know some theists that behave badly. I know some wonderful people that do not believe/have doubts about the supernatural. I know some wonderful people that are of a different Christian denomination/religion than me. There are some wonderful people that do not agree with me on some things I believe if I did would be sinful and vice versa. One of the major problems is most of us (myself included) can see the speck in our neighbour’s eye but not the beam in our own.

I can’t convenience you, but will you agree what once would be considered impossible is now possible? What if our knowledge continues to grow exponentially, possibly unlock our unused brain capacity, what could we achieve then? Are you opposed to another dimension if I do not call it “heaven?” Are you opposed to beings from another dimension if I do not call them angels? How would ancient man’s encounter with an advanced being be written? Or do you think scientists that hypothesize about other dimensions/advanced beings are into the supernatural?

I’m a Christian just ruminating on the supernatural/natural relationship. As I said the more advanced we become the less “miraculous” some of these things seem to me. So is it possible advanced beings visited our planet in the past?

However, the very existence of the law of entropy points to a Creator, because systems that are wearing out must first have been made new, and beings that die must first have been given life. The very idea of a universal naturalistic evolution of all things into more complex systems is contrary to all real scientific data and is contradicted by all human experience. – Henry M. Morris, Ph.D.

So do we have to take the six days in Genesis literally? Why can’t we take that symbolically? I don’t take Genesis literally but I believe “God created the heavens and the earth.”

Are you opposed to the things scientists are proposing as mentioned in my post to Bob? Or are you just opposed to things like that with biblical sounding names? Is it impossible for a being of pure energy to have a will? TBD (to be determined).

However you want to say it, there are wolves and sheep. I want as much personal freedom for myself and for my neighbour. But can our society function if everybody does what they want, when they want, to hell with what the other person wants? IMO, no.

Frank:
And so you have put forth..”……out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth what is good;….indeed it is this verse of which I speak the good words to your edification but alas if it falls on spoiled soil, what good things will it bring to pass from such a soiled heart? Who has knowledge speaks truth; who has no knowledge, quotes scripture……….incessantly without context, without direction; it is like a leaf blowing every which way the wind will be its master…..

Frank:
It is hardly any wonder why you are so unknowledgeable about reality when you quote somebody who talks about the science of creationism and the inerrancy of the bible. Having Ph.D is nothing more noteworthy about that than the academia of studying real science which by the way is this: Hydraulic engineering as a sub-discipline of civil engineering is concerned with the flow and conveyance of fluids, principally water and sewage. I did that when I practiced plumbing and hot water heating after high school. But just to give some backgrounder to your idea of a reputable quote:

Henry Madison Morris (October 6, 1918 – February 25, 2006) was an American young Earth creationist, Christian apologist, and engineer. He was one of the founders of the Creation Research Society and the Institute for Creation Research. He is considered by many to be “the father of modern creation science.” He is widely known for coauthoring The Genesis Flood with John C. Whitcomb in 1961.

As Morris believed in the inerrancy of the Bible, he opposed the billions-of-years time scales of evolution, the age of the Earth, and the age of the Universe that he saw as being contrary to it. Morris’ influential approach, while adopted widely by the modern creationist movement, continues to be rejected by the mainstream scientific community, as well as old Earth creationists and theistic evolutionists. Quoting rejects give no credence to anything you say when you have no credence from anything you say or don’t say as the case most often is, offering only quotes and videos of others to support them but certainly does nothing to support you.

Paul:
You ask “But can our society function if everybody does what they want, when they want, to hell with what the other person wants? I agree with you, chaos must not prevail; nevertheless, there are governments that mitigate this chaos with laws, police and a judiciary system that decides right and wrong in the name of the justice and dispenses verdicts accordingly, especially in democratic secular governments, not theocratic governments, that is a step backward and not a future reasonable people want to go back to………and I class religious people as being reasonable only to a point of common sensical understanding of the physical world, not as it relates to the superstitious or those afraid of supernatural shadows. Religion as we all know wants to impose a universal morality which is why it has always attracted the kind of person who thinks other people’s private lives are their business.

And religion’s God; well, he’s got galaxy upon galaxy to attend to but he’s especially concerned with what we do, and he’s especially concerned with what we do when naked. And he almost certainly disapproves of homosexuality and everything else according to the mindsets of ancient men who did not know what a compass was, meteorology, how to control fire, make a wheel or epilepsy but they knew everything about the supernatural, the thunder and lightening wrath of god, everything about dreams visited by ghosts, angels and demons.

Now Paul, with all due respect, there isn’t any reason why you can’t take the “six days” symbolically; I take it symbolically but there also isn’t any reason why you shouldn’t take “God” symbolically either. One just has to equate God on the same level of Gravity, it affects everything and everybody, everywhere in the Cosmos but no thing or no person, no where is affected on a personal-only level. If two people are climbing the side of a mountain and one falls down the mountain side to great injury or death, it has nothing to do with good, evil, wrath or sin. By the same token the God of Jesus that operates within the human being and the only God Jesus referred to over and over again IS the Father operating on a personal level but it is everybody’s choice to be a party to the proposition that all there is of good is available to the man who is available to all there is of good. operating within, if you let it.

The two above described Gods I submit, are different; i.e., the cosmic God is the Deity, the eternal, forever, infinite; and, the second is the personal God, the Theity: an interventionist God, who is intimately involved with human affairs and the personal God that operates within the human spirit to do good for ourselves and others and the world at large. That is the God of Jesus, the one Jesus called the “Father”

If we accept the proposition of the Father within, as Jesus did, we let that God operate as the essence guiding our life; if we reject it, then the guiding force is the absence of good that leads inevitability to chaotic and violent human behavior and relationships…

ESSENCE: is joy, peace, love, hope, serenity, humility, kindness, benevolence, empathy, generosity, truth, compassion, happiness, charity and supports the sanctity of life and the preservation thereof and reaping from seeds sown the rewards of the proposition that all there is of good is available to the man who is available to all there is of good and that is as good as it gets for a man without evil

ABSENCE: is anger, envy, sorrow, regret, greed, arrogance, self-pity, guilt, resentment, inferiority, lies, false pride, superiority, and ego and disregards the sanctity of life but exploits death for its own end reaping from seeds sown the awards of the proposition that all there is of evil is available to the man who is available to all there is of evil and that is as evil as it gets for a man without good.

Then what’s left to say to you, Leo, but, pity the fool; you’ll never get it. For as many as are the promises of God, in Him they are yes; therefore also through Him is our Amen to the glory of God through us. (2 Corinthians 1:20)

I agree – no theocratic government in this age, not even one based on my religious beliefs.

I think breaking any of the Ten Commandments is sinful but only the following Commandments should be illegal imo: VI (murder), VIII (man-stealing), IX (false witness). I did not include VII (adultery) but rape would obviously be illegal. Theft would obviously be illegal too but I believe the VIII has to do with man-stealing not theft because the punishment was death for breaking the VIII Commandment but not for theft. Because of our flaws and New Testament teachings I’m not a big fan of the death penalty. However, society would have to be protected from predators so jail would be required. According to Judaism there is something like 616 “commandments” if my memory is correct. Same would go for them, only some should be illegal. Then freedom of speech so opposing views can be heard. Winning hearts and minds for Christ, not laws are what is going to change things.

Jesus Christ taught hate and lust are also breaking the spirit of the VI and VII respectively but they shouldn’t be illegal either imo even though I’d consider them also sinful. Hate and lust can very easily lead to sin but I’d be very scared of flawed human beings prosecuting these offences. Of course, inciting violence against an identifiable group should be illegal but freedom of speech must be protected. Unfortunately hurting someone’s feelings, even by telling the truth, is a crime in Canada under our hate speech laws.

The problem for me is not the laws which have been passed on the behalf of oppressed groups rights, it is the curtailing of opposing groups rights to protest and even disagree because of hate speech laws. I agree – what people do legally in their private lives is not my business but why do I have to approve of their actions? Isn’t it enough that as a Christian I love them, I’ve also got to approval of behaviour I think could cause them/society harm?

God the Father as cosmos and God the Holy Spirit as personal? I saw a very interesting video years ago comparing the attributes of God to energy, gravity, electro-magnetism or something like that. Some kinda Jewish kabala mysticism thing I believe. It was interesting but I don’t remember if it accounted for what appears to be design/purpose to creation.

Even with the estimated numbers of years available blind evolution is a concept I just can’t grasp. Forget about the whole primordial soup and life beginning once complex creatures “evolved” to mutate (which is usually a negative) blindly into such diversity boggles the mind. To me the caterpillar turning into the butterfly and flight seem to contradict blind evolution. A rodent like mammal being ancestor of land based mammals seems also to contradict blind evolution. If all by chance what would the mathematical odds be to that?

It just recently occurred to me I correspond to you like I would to another theist I disagree with and not as an atheist. Probably because our basic conflict stems from a different interpretation of scripture. Have you considered the possibility advanced beings visited the earth and the biblical miracles you dismiss are actually the result of technology beyond our present day understanding? And they return saying – “we’re back.” They tell us there’s no God and offer to take us under their wing and share everything with us as long as we do what they say. It would be a counterfeit second coming.

Despite what the producers at the History Channel would have us believe, there is no definitive proof that ancient aliens ever visited Earth, so equating E.T. with angels doesn’t work for me. In the past, I have occasionally referred to supernatural beliefs as fairy tales. I apologize for that insulting and condescending over generalization. I have come to realize that it is appropriate to separate the fairy tale beliefs of children and immature adults – E.T., Jack and the Beanstalk, Cinderella, witches and wizards, zombies and vampires, ghosts, Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, etc., etc. – from the validity of supernatural beliefs as defined by various holy scriptures. No one with any reasonable level of maturity believes in fairy tales, whereas beliefs in the supernatural, as defined by scripture, I now realize provide real meaning to many and thus should not be denigrated. Where I depart in accepting those beliefs as valid for me personally has more to do with rules of evidence and my scientific training.

In his PBS Cosmos series, Carl Sagan popularized the phrase “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”, a modern day English language version of an old David Hume argument. In a nutshell, if one is to accept the validity of claims, whether about fairy tales or supernatural beliefs in God, that are well outside the accepted norms of natural experience, as science and normal everyday human experience defines it, then you must have an irrefutable level of documentation to support those claims. Strictly speaking, written scriptural accounts of previous hearsay oral traditions do not count as irrefutable evidence. You could argue that scripture should be believed because it is absolutely true. I think the argument goes that since God is perfect, then his words (as relayed to us by his holy prophets) must be absolutely true.

There was a time when I accepted religious doctrine as one form of absolute truth. I have recently come to believe that is a naïve assessment. The way nearly everyone here argues over their differing interpretations of the meaning of scriptures makes it hard to accept that everyone is correct. Exegesis is fine if it brings absolute truth and meaning to your life, but speaking as an outside scientist looking in, not everyone can be absolutely correct. The differences can be subtle, but they also, on occasion, appear to be mutually exclusive. In science, when there is no consensus agreement on the validity of a hypothesis, the hypothesis is rejected and one starts over. I guessing such a rejection would not be the case with exegesis arguments. Anyone care to comment?

Yes I have gone through the beings from outer space phase visiting earth in ancient times; the Erich Von Daniken, Chariots of the Gods and in particular I often thought about Ezekiel’s description reminded me of a helicopter.

And one could make a good science fiction story for earth having become populated by victim’s from Mars when their global warming went out of control and their atmosphere eventually blew away by solar flare activity and oceans of water evaporated by climate warming with the remnant survivors escaping the Martian climate to planet earth in their spaceships during the period the dinosaurs still roamed the sister planet. That would have happened millions of years ago of course and no remnants of that long a past would remain to excavate, but I can’t quite figure how the three races came from Mars or if two came one came and one or two races already inhabiting the earth when the other one or two arrived. The Negroid, the Mongoloid and the Caucasoid became the three races from which all human/martian diversity eventually evolved into present day Earthlings.

The Ten Commandments surely need some revisions as you point out but I believe they were all capital offense punishable by death in ancient times along with other commandments that didn’t make the Top Ten list. I think stealing would have been been a social sin that could carry the capital punishment by citizens taking “the law into their own hands” and being given the benefit of the doubt by the self defense, defense.

“You shall not boil a young goat in its mother’s milk.” seems sacrilegious in any case, much like my own revulsion of eating fried eggs and KFC chicken pieces together feels intuitively distasteful.

“……….and the biblical miracles you dismiss are actually the result of technology beyond our present day understanding?”

No I think they all within our grasp of understanding., nothing high tech about the fishes and the loaves, or the Exodus guided by a pillar of light but night and a pillar of cloud by day and nothing high tech about the fermentation process that turns water into wine and exchanging the six stoneware water pots with six stoneware water pots filled with wine from the brewery of one of Jesus’ best friends expressly devised b y Jesus for the purposes of an example of how he could tackle any problem that may arise with a little common sense and planning.

See my video on how the loaves and fishes appeared, not out of thin air but common sense planning for the Billy Graham type retreat of thousands…..not once but twice:

Tell me any miracle explanation that can out perform common sense planning no high tech needed: The military performs this feat regularly on a daily basis for it’s thousands of military personnel.

and see how a taxi driver “miraculously” cured the cripple begging in the streets

The Army of Rome consisted of three types of soldiers: The Praetorian Guard (Caesar’s bodyguard), The Legionaries (infantry soldiers and officers made up of citizens), and The Auxiliaries (non-citizen troops).

The backbone of the Roman army were the centurions. The centurions were legionaries and they were clearly noticed because they wore a special helmet, and a more ornate harness of much better quality. They carried a short vinewood staff as a symbol of rank. They worked their way up the ranks as soldiers, and were promoted for their dedication and courage. They were the veteran soldiers who commanded 100 men each, within a legion of 6,000. There were thus 60 centuries in a legion, each under the command of a centurion. During the time of Augustus there were 28 legions. A total military of
168,000 soldiers not counting The Praetorian Guard and The Auxiliaries.

During the time of Jesus the headquarters of the Roman army in Judea was located at Caesarea, on the Mediterranean coast.

Bob, regarding post #211, you make some good points and ask some good honest questions once again.

I’m not just going to dismiss your questions by saying you must just “believe it” and not offer anything to support that. I will try to add something more meaningful than that, I hope.

I will start with the exegesis of scripture and all the differing interpretations out there. I would be lying if I said that it is easy to correctly understand all the doctrines of the bible, it is not. I’ve been a believer in Christ for the better part of my life and I’ve been through several “reforms” of my understanding of Christian doctrine. Much of that has come through just better interpretation of the scriptures by reading things more in the context of when it was written and to whom it was written to. Some people believe that all things from Genesis to Revelation is written for them and is speaking to them, I think this an easy mistake we make when we start reading scripture and this alone can take one into all kinds of erroneous teachings. I can say though, that regardless of the many reforms I have had in my understanding of scripture, the one constant that has remained, even from the time when I was a little boy as a Catholic, is the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. I think that is where one needs to start when looking at the scriptures. This is the central truth and core of what we believe as Christians. It is the death and resurrection of Christ that is under the most attack and is the most heavily contested event by those in opposition. Without this core truth there is no faith, and there is no Jesus who can save us from ultimate death. Part and parcel with the truth of the resurrection is to recognize it is for us, and that we can receive eternal life through a genuine faith in Christ that is heart felt and not just some head knowledge of historical facts. Belief in some historical facts of Jesus does not save someone, this is not a science experiment nor can we treat the resurrection and faith in Christ in the same way we make scientific claims and test the results. That is the wrong approach. This is a matter of the heart and speaks to all things which makes us uniquely human which is much more than a mere collection of atoms and cells.

As for the scriptural accounts themselves, you can read the textual criticism of the experts, of which I am not, but they will tell you that in general, the writings of the new testament were written not long after the events occurred and that there was not enough time for the accounts to be attributed to legend. Most of the new testament writers were eye witnesses of Jesus, they walked and talked with him directly in some cases such as Peter, John, Luke and James for example. We must ask ourselves what is the motivation for these people to make this up and write lies ? Most if not all of these people died a horrible death proclaiming the resurrection of Christ. Why would they die for something they knew to be a lie or something that they were not sure was even true ? I don’t think it’s easy to dismiss the scriptural accounts as hearsay without a solid justification as to why it would be hearsay. When reading the gospels and the book of Acts, I don’t get the impression that someone is trying to pull the wool over my eyes with fairy tales of a resurrection of Christ. It rings true of a genuine history and a genuine narrative even though there are fantastic claims of the supernatural that I cannot comprehend. But after all, we are talking about God here, so you would think the supernatural would come into play at some point, would it not ?

For the scriptures to be an embellishment or a made up reality would be quite a feat indeed, since we have this collection of writings that span thousands of years of human history, old testament and new testament, yet these writings agree and testify of the One True God and in the coming savior Jesus Christ. Despite the various interpretations, the message from Genesis to Revelation is coherent an consistent culminating in the coming Messiah Who is the focal point and Who in the end is revealed as the Creator Himself in human form.

2Pe 1:16 For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty.
2Pe 1:17 For when he received honor and glory from God the Father, and the voice was borne to him by the Majestic Glory, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased,”
2Pe 1:18 we ourselves heard this very voice borne from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain.

Thanks guys. Naz, I think it is a question of faith in one’s beliefs and we each, as we are all entitled, hold to our own version of what is true, depending on our upbringing, education and personal needs. Frank, I had never heard the term “hermeneutics” before now. At the moment my reading priority, when not finishing up Who Was Jesus on the side, is to figure out which of several dozen Medicare insurance plans is right for my wife and I to purchase for the first time in the next 2 months. I converted the book to mobi format and loaded it into my Kindle. I will get to it eventually, I promise. Scout’s honor. Cross my heart.

Bob, I will respectfully disagree with you regarding the comment about our upbringing and education.

Let’s take a look at a third person, the apostle Paul. Here’s a guy that was a master of the Jewish law, a Pharisee and a persecutor of Christians. All his upbringing and all his education was about serving God according to the law of Moses. Yes, his beliefs were embedded in his upbringing as a Jew growing up under the Torah. He was immersed in it totally from a young age.

But there was a radical change in his beliefs that went beyond his education and upbringing which made him renounce his beliefs and the way in which he lived his life. After his conversion he no longer lived his life as one under the law but as one with faith in Christ. The message of Jesus brought a new understanding and new revelation that superseded and renovated his thinking. As he said in his letters, “we are a new creation, all things have become new”.

I would like you to consider that you do not have to be the sum total of your upbringing and/or your education. People always say, I was born this way that’s who I am. I am not saying we should lament who we are or regret our upbringing, but we should not limit ourselves to circumstance and pedigree.

The message of Christ is not an add on appendage to help us polish our morality or give us some sort of phony religious status. It is life and life more abundantly that we all seek after in so many ways but cannot find.

Php 3:3 For we are the circumcision, who worship by the Spirit of God and glory in Christ Jesus and put no confidence in the flesh—
Php 3:4 though I myself have reason for confidence in the flesh also. If anyone else thinks he has reason for confidence in the flesh, I have more:
Php 3:5 circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; as to the law, a Pharisee;
Php 3:6 as to zeal, a persecutor of the church; as to righteousness under the law, blameless.
Php 3:7 But whatever gain I had, I counted as loss for the sake of Christ.
Php 3:8 Indeed, I count everything as loss because of the surpassing worth of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord. For his sake I have suffered the loss of all things and count them as rubbish, in order that I may gain Christ
Php 3:9 and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith—
Php 3:10 that I may know him and the power of his resurrection, and may share his sufferings, becoming like him in his death,

That’s fair Naz. However, education is a never ending process and four years of visiting this website has contributed to that. It has more clearly brought into focus my understanding of my own personal beliefs about religion and science. It has also made me more tolerant of other’s beliefs and I make an effort to at least try to understand alternate points of view, even if I don’t agree with them. I consider that a good thing and wish everyone else would make a similar effort.

Leo, get off your knowledge soap box, I am talking about the knowledge of the truth here, not mere belief or hope that something might be true. You are off base….as usual…we know it’s true !

1Ti 2:3 This is good, and it is pleasing in the sight of God our Savior,
1Ti 2:4 who desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.
1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,

I admire your commitment to the natural world and don’t take any offence from your position. I have a few atheist friends and family members that would agree with you.

From my studies I have concluded these many different religions you observe have quite a lot in common. Different names for the same gods/goddesses due to language and local changes due to geographical separation. Because they are polytheistic certain of them have a different god/goddess pecking order also.

The RCC uses Christian sounding names but these names are for their pagan gods/goddesses. Tammuz becomes Jesus Christ and the queen of heaven becomes Mary. Nimrod is the father. The supporting cast of gods/goddesses become patron saints. It’s Baal worship in reality just like the others which can all be traced back to ancient Babylon.

Most of the bible believing Christian Churches share a lot of things in common but separate over small differences. Do not consider this as a negative, the biggest threat to mankind is the growing demand for world unity (political, religious, economic, language, culture). Because most split from the RCC which purged the Jewish roots of Christianity, many of them have similar false holydays, rites and customs as mommy. I’ve been told the protest is over and why don’t I come back home lol. It’s not over for me.

I talk with my atheist friend often about religion. He’s waiting for what he calls the “big boom.” I then remind him about the false prophet calling fire down from heaven. Too much sci-fi perhaps or maybe the New Jerusalem is a space ship. There will be a false encounter before the real one as prophesied.

Keep an eye on the false ecumenical movement lead by the RCC anyway. God help us all if they get 100s of millions of angry “Protestants”, Muslims, etc…. to join their church. Once I found out about papal supremacy I don’t trust those RC. Nothing worse then someone doing god’s will holding a sharp axe.

Thanks for the reply, videos and info about Roman soldiers. He was probably on the way to a Benny Hinn Miracle Crusade.

I appreciated the clarification about you considering the extra-terrestrial connection. Because you take the bible with a natural world view I thought that might fill in some of the things that don’t jive for me about your hypothesis. The ascension, angels at the tomb, advanced medicine/technology curing/performing miraculous events similar to those described in the bible, etc as we previously discussed.

Anyway, I personally enjoyed ruminating about the supernatural vs. natural in light of advanced technology.

We homo sapiens have been around for 200,000 years reportedly with about 6,000 years of present civilization depending on your source. Knowledge has increased dramatically from the stone to nuclear age but our emotional state hasn’t seemed to keep up.

Sadly because of past wrongs, Christian concerns about the swing to the left has gotten us dismissed as haters. In some cases a justifiable charge but quite often it is a misunderstanding due to frustration. I do worry about the changes in norms but mostly the change in opposition to disagreement is my main concern. IMO suppressing dissent is way more dangerous then letting people air their differences openly. It should be okay to disagree, I can honestly say everybody disagrees with at least a few of the things I believe. My childhood was excellent training to handle internet ridicule so not much bothers me. Besides I’m pretty sure of my position and if presented with new evidence I’ll check it out.

I really enjoy discussing religion with those who agree and also disagree with me. Actually I learn the most from people with vastly different positions then myself. Jews have been the best followed by atheists and RC.

I only recommend talking to a Jew if you are solid in your faith otherwise you could get converted, those guys got their arguments down pat. They really helped me out though to understand Christianity. Despite what RC have told me, most if not all of the New Testament writers were Jews or writing based on Jewish accountants and were not “Catholic.” The Jewish insights really helped me separate biblical Christianity from paganized Christianity but I don’t think I’ll ever get it all sorted out.

Atheists help me keep grounded and help point out other things of a supernatural nature a Jew won’t bring up. Since the OT is filled with the supernatural they kinda can’t say much there. Of course I look around and can’t imagine this is by chance even if 13.8 billion years old so atheism isn’t a mathematical possibility for me.

RC are the easiest, pretty much just do the opposite of them. Other than a few of the big ones they pretty much messed everything up. I can’t really have a discussion with them anymore but some of the pastors I listen to think we should share the gospel with them. I didn’t think it would work (been there done that) but gave it a try. Of course it ended badly and now I just get my thoughts out there hoping a RC will read it and the Holy Spirit will use that to convict them. Frustration is a big problem when talking to RC and I do get a little snarky. They call it trolling, I call it fishing for men/women. They have helped though, a quick example is “Tabernacle.” That got me thinking about the incarnation and the OT biblical festival of the same name. Not a romophobe, love Catholics but not a big fan of Catholicism, been called a heretic and condemned to hell to often.

I often wonder if how are brains are wired effects our belief system? Is that unbiblical or makes sense with the parable about the wheat and tares? For me it’s so simple, either God always was and always will be or the Universe always was and always will be? Blind evolution just makes no sense. If there is a God why not walk amongst us? Of course others focus on other things and think differently. We sure “live in interesting times.”

“We homo sapiens have been around for 200,000 years reportedly with about 6,000 years of present civilization depending on your source……”

I thought the following might “spark” your interest about controlled fire…….

Until the Wonderwerk Cave find, Gesher Benot Ya’aqov, a lakeside site in Israel, was considered to have the oldest generally accepted evidence of human-controlled fire. There, a team of scientists found traces of numerous hearths dating to between 690,000 and 790,000 years ago. A wide range of clues made this site convincing, including isolated clusters of burned flint, as if toolmakers had been knapping hand axes by several firesides. The team also found fragments of burned fruit, grain and wood scattered about.

Then came Wonderwerk. The ash-filled sediment that Goldberg and Berna found came from a spot approximately 100 feet from the entrance to the tunnel-like cave, too far to have been swept in by the elements. The team also found circular chips of fractured stone known as pot-lid flakes — telltale signs of fire — in the same area. These clues turned up throughout the million-year-old layer of sediment, indicating that fires had burned repeatedly at the site.

You can read the article here: SOURCE: FROM THE MAY 2013 ISSUE
Archaeologists Find Earliest Evidence of Humans Cooking With Fire

This early beacon on the journey of man was lit long before modern humans evolved. Sites that provide the oldest good evidence for the controlled use of fire include Swartkrans in South Africa, where the burned bone leftovers of prehistoric meals date to between 1 million and 1.5 million years ago.

THIS IS WHEN I BELIEVE THE “GOD” FACTOR CAME INTO BEING for the Jewish Nation: Fire being the spirit of God from the heavens. and unto whom did it come? The Chosen People of course! And Woe to the enemies of the Chosen People and ever since the rest of the world viewed the Chosen People as the worse of the worse since that FIERY DAY…..when they stoked the embers so it did not go out by day or by night. Leviticus 6:12-13 ……….and eventually turned fire onto their enemies and burned them, their livestock and their villages to the ground……..of all those who worshipped false Gods………
“And there came a fire out from before the LORD, and consumed upon the altar the burnt offering and the fat: which when all the people saw, they shouted, and fell on their faces.” Leviticus 9:24 reports that the fire appeared miraculously, “from before the Lord!”

The finds make Homo erectus, our direct human ancestor, the earliest known fire-starter. This milestone opened up greater culinary opportunities by enabling humans to consume meats and tough plants more easily. The life-changing impact of fire use is revealed in the dramatically reduced chewing muscles of humans compared with those of earlier hominins (as humans and their fossil ancestors are called). Cooking by fire upped the intake of energy-rich meat and plants required to fuel the calorie-hungry growth of the modern human brain.

I forget if it was Naz or Frank (or was it Paul?) that said it didn’t matter to them if the planet was 6000 or 4.6 billion years old. It didn’t make any difference with respect to their faith. In the context of “preaching to the choir” that could be considered a valid position. It is not unreasonable to argue it makes little difference at Thursday evening men’s Bible study sessions or at Sunday worship services what the facts of science are. It does matter, however, if one wishes to have a place at the table in a debate of a science versus religious world view. It also matters with regard to the education of one’s children. The moment you remark that the Bible says the planet is 6000 years old the scientists in the room will tune you out before you can get the next sentence out of your mouth. You will be deemed to be an ignorant zealot, unfit for further consideration, no matter how profound may be any insights you have to offer to the discussion. I suppose it goes back to the perfect God and “absolute” truth of scripture argument. In this case, however, James Ussher got it wrong. The Old Testament genealogies are not a complete record of everyone born between Adam and Nebuchadnezzar and the planet is indeed 4.6 billion years old.

I take a dim view of those on both sides, who for the sake of the purity of the philosophical positions, go to the extremes fringes of their respective arguments. Contrary to what they would have us believe, atheists are not the children of Satan and religious people are not believers in childish fairy tales. I have much more respect for the Ken Millers of this world who are able to achieve a balance between their faith and their science. As Miller explains in his book Only a Theory, evolution is soundly based on scientific fact. While those facts are not absolute truths, as scientific truth is always tentative, not absolute, they are accepted by science as the best current model for the diversity of life on this planet, no matter how incredulous some may find those facts. Indeed, that model is so accepted as valid that it is now the very core of biology education at every major university in the country, including the programs at Notre Dame, Loyola, Southern Methodist, Baylor and hundreds of other church based colleges and universities. Put your Bibles down for a couple of evenings and read Miller’s book. Your children will thank you for it, especially those who may wish to study and perhaps do research in biology.

The info is appreciated. I do not disagree with the evidence indicating human like beings have been on the planet earth long before the 200,000 year old date I cited for homo sapiens. My main point was – it appears our ability to live and let live has stalled while our ability to do catastrophic damage with weapons of mass destruction has escalated.

Just previous to my #225 posting a lovely Catholic called me a heretic for having the nerve to disagree with her and Holy Mother Church. Fire as punishment is also fondly embraced by the RCC (the new chosen people so I’m told). It’s a big joke with them and they long for the good ole days when heretics were burned at the stake. When you point out the insanity of such statements you are chastised and sarcastically told when was the last time a heretic was burnt? Of course they don’t understand it’s not just what the RCC did, it’s what they are doing and what many of us believe they will do (ie. false Church of Revelation). It wasn’t fire but firearms that a religious nut job (RCC says they worship the same god as Muslims) murdered and maimed numerous people recently in Florida, so I don’t like jokes about burning heretics.

Don’t look at me to defend some of the horrible acts done in God’s name in the Old Testament. My POV would be quite different from yours though because of my pilgrimage. I just studied the New Testament mostly, Pslams and Proverbs occasionally until my 30’s or so. I heard the Old Testament in Church when younger but the horrible acts didn’t register. It wasn’t until some one told me how much of the New Testament was based on the Old Testament that I studied it equally. So I view the Old Testament through the lens of the New with an understanding of the Father as per the parable of the prodigal son.

So if you were my neighbour picking up sticks from your lawn on the Sabbath after a wind storm. I’d be asking you if you needed help not grabbing you and making sure you were stoned to death.

I don’t think that was me, but it doesn’t matter to me if the big bang happened 13.8 billion years ago and this is the first go round or the universe has been expanding and contracting always. I don’t consider the bible a science or history book. I consider it an owners manual for human beings. I use it as a mirror to see myself, others use it as a club to beat their neighbour over the head with. Others have different uses I’m sure. God gave us two books the bible and the natural world, I look to both for different reasons.

Time and space are very interesting concepts that I have only scratched the surface of. I’m hoping one day to do more research on the passage of time at the source of the big bang compared to the passage of time on earth since the big bang.

I don’t worry if some think the world is 6000 years old or was created to look 4.6 billion years old. I worry if some one thinks the world is 6000 years old and wants to kill me because I have no problem with it being 4.6 billon years old.

At one time we thought the earth stood still and everything revolved around us and the world was flat. I don’t dismiss science but I don’t jump on the band wagon until things have been tried and tested. I don’t believe the earth was made in six 24 hour days but its not the Law of Evolution yet. Some interesting evidence but still big holes in blind evolution imo and that’s not just because I’m a theist. As you know many theists don’t have a problem with God using evolution, this is what I was taught as a child. Once I did research later, I found the evidence wasn’t as cut and dried as I was told. I’m presently a skeptic not believing in the biblical creation story or blind evolution as factual.

What is happening now is we are getting into areas where science can take us to places we might not be ready or shouldn’t go. This is where “faith” could be helpful, not Galileo is a heretic nut job “faith.” But should we be genetically engineering people “faith?”

I am open & committed to an evidentiary approach in formulating my view of the world in which we live. More than a statement of opinions I look to see why someone holds the opinons they do. As to the actual age of the earth & universe I understand the evidence as showing the matter remains open to legitamate debate.

The operative word here is legitimate. When Veith publishes his “research” in a peer reviewed scientific journal, then I will give it legitimate consideration. You’ll forgive me if I don’t hold my breath waiting for that to happen.

Bob, based on the genealogies of the bible Christians can say that the Earth is approx 600 years old. However, we must take into account time, space and gravity in determining the apparent age of the earth and the universe.

There is one particular theory that I like by Dr. Russel Humphreys which states that the universe was formed from a white hole which is the opposite of a black hole. The theory goes on to say that due to the immense gravitational effects of the “creation event” initiated by God, that time moved very fast during the initial creation event so that billions of “our” years elapsed in just a few days.

This would explain the apparent contradiction of the scientist view of an old universe versus the creationists view of a 6000 year old universe. My point is, there could be a logical, physical explanation of why we see this disparity if we take into account the knowledge we have about space, time and gravity.

I am not saying that Humphrey’s theory is 100% correct but I think he’s onto something here. When the bible says that God “spoke” things into existence, we don’t know the mechanism or how that happened. We don’t know if everything just appeared or if God initiated some ordered process that resulted in the creation of the universe as it appears Humphrey’s suggests.

No doubt about it, evangelizing the Gospel will desensitize you to rejection. It will also fortify your sense of direction & purpose. I know of no greater source of motivational drive than learning about the One who created & maintains all there is, was, or ever shall be.

To the best of my knowledge the universe is NOT eternal. Perhaps Bob can supply the scientific formalities regarding that matter. I think it relates to the Law of Thermodynamics.

To clarify, and at the risk of going way off topic, Dr. Veith’s writings, like Henry Morris and John Whitcomb before him and George McCready Price before them, are scientifically inadequate attempts to justify a young Earth creationist, book of Genesis model for the history of our planet (you can add David Plaisted and Russell Humphreys names to that list as well). They use the language of science but not the logic of the scientific method to make their case, a case which has been shown time and again (and again and again, as explained in Ken Miller’s book) to not fit the available scientific data. It’s not acceptable for one’s hypothesis to fit only some of the data some of the time. When it cannot explain all of the available information, the hypothesis is rejected as scientifically inadequate, if not invalid.

I read alternate points of view in order to understand the logic of the beliefs of the author. That does not mean I give those beliefs legitimacy equal to that of accepted scientific understandings. There is no basis for legitimate debate when the opposing arguments are a grossly inadequate representation of established fact. The scientific community has soundly rejected the validity of the claims of the young earth creationists and I don’t expect that to ever change. I thus will not be holding my breath waiting for the writings of young Earth creationists to appear in a peer reviewed scientific journal.

I found the Professor Veith video very interesting, thanks. I haven’t seen that one before but I saw a couple other ones and they were also enjoyable.

I don’t worry about whether the bible is accurately representing the flood story or not but the Professor gave me something to think about. I used to believe in the flood story and I don’t have any problem with those who take it literally but now I’m skeptical. However, I do believe in a massive local flood in that area of the world though where scientists even think that was an historical event. Does the whole world mean the whole world or the known world?

The other interesting thing the Professor brought up was when to start the clock. Even if the scientists are correct the clock doesn’t start 13.8 billon years ago or even 4.5 billon years ago if you believe the moon was created shortly after the earth. But even if it’s a few billion years ago the clock starts and you don’t reset or set it back for the global extinction events that occurred since then, blind evolution doesn’t seem to stand alone by itself. Besides the complexity at microscopic levels it’s the why. Not the why as in purpose but why as a means to an end (eg. flight, sight, butterflies, mammals). Why did the fully formed rodent like mammal millions of years ago evolve into a human like being blindly? That’s a lot of mutations.

First it was small changes (mutations aren’t usually good) over long periods of time building one upon another without throw back. Now it’s huge leaps quickly to adapt to quick changes in the environment. If the bible said God used evolution to create life on earth, atheists would laugh us to scorn I’d bet.

Paul, and for those who are interested, check out William Ryan and Walter Pitman’s Noah’s Flood: The New Scientific Discoveries About the Event that Changed History. An interesting science based explanation for the flood story.

All, just to add to the conversation regarding young versus old earth, the evolutionary scientist has an insurmountable problem of how matter appeared in the first place. He must explain how something came from nothing. The origins problem is at the very heart of this discussion.

Where did the first atom of matter come from ?

I think the old versus young argument is moot until we address this most fundamental issue. As Christians we have an answer, although we may not be able to articulate it to the satisfaction of doubting scientists. Nevertheless we have an answer and it’s even written in a book !

I don’t know if any doubting scientist has ever considered that it just might be that obvious….

Heb 11:3 By faith we understand that the universe was created by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things that are visible.

I note your suggestion re: Ryan & Pitman and found the criticism as well:

While some geologists claim it as fact that the sequence of events described occurred, there is debate over their suddenness and magnitude. In particular, if the water level of the Black Sea had initially been higher, the effect of the spillover would have been much less dramatic. A large part of the academic geological community also continues to reject the idea that there could have been enough sustained long-term pressure by water from the Aegean to dig through a supposed isthmus at the present Bosphorus or enough of a difference in water levels (if at all) between the two water basins.

Countering the hypothesis of Ryan and Pitman are data collected prior to its publication by Ukrainian and Russian scientists, including Valentina Yanko-Hombach, who claims that the water flow through the Bosphorus repeatedly reversed direction over geological time depending on fluctuation in the levels of the Aegean Sea and the Black Sea. That contradicts the hypothesized catastrophic breakage of a Bosphorus sill.

Likewise, the water levels calculated by Yanko-Hombach differed widely from those hypothesized by Ryan and Pitman.

In 2007, a research anthology on the topic was published which makes much of the earlier Russian research available in English for the first time and combines it with more recent scientific findings.

A five-year cross-disciplinary research project under the sponsorship of UNESCO and the International Union of Geological Sciences was conducted 2005–9.

A February 2009 article reported that the flooding might have been “quite mild”.

According to a study by Liviu Giosan et al., the level in the Black Sea before the marine reconnection was 30 m below present sea level, rather than the 80 m, or lower, of the catastrophe theories. If the flood occurred at all, the sea level increase and the flooded area during the reconnection were significantly smaller than previously proposed. It also occurred earlier than initially surmised, ca. 7400 BC, rather than the originally proposed 5600 BC. Since the depth of the Bosphorus, in its middle furrow, at present varies from 36 to 124 m, with an average depth of 65 m, a calculated stone age shoreline in the Black Sea lying 30 m lower than in the present day would imply that the contact with the Mediterranean may never have been broken during the Holocene, and hence there could have been no sudden waterfall-style transgression.

A 2012 study based on process length variation of the dinoflagellate cyst Lingulodinium machaerophorum shows no evidence for catastrophic flooding.

About the only thing scientists can agree on seems to be that the Sun shines during the revolution of the earth on one side of the globe and calls it day and while it shines on the second half of the globe the first half experiences an absence of sun called Night.

Although I am quite sure Republicans would dispute this if Obama said it.

And please let’s quit with telling everybody what Paul thinks about anything….What did Jesus say about it…anything? Paul was as much a supernaturalist as you are except that he killed people like you was complicit in Jesus death as well as in Stephen’s death so get Paul out of your mind and get your mind into Jesus, the real Jesus not the one Paul made up and then told everybody who he was even though he never knew or met Jesus other than if he was a spy for the Pharisees as an apprentice in the Sanhedrin.

I find your retort rather shallow: “Nevertheless we have an answer and it’s even written in a book !”

Do you need to be reminded that it is also written in your book that David sent a soldier to his death so he could marry the soldier’s wife with whom he had already committed adultery and after which Bathsheba, daughter of Eliam and wife of Uriah the Hittite, became pregnant. And they both should be killed?

Whatsoever hath no fins nor scales in the waters, that shall be an abomination unto you.

“‘If a man also lie with mankind as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death: their blood shall be upon them.

Six days shall work be done; but on the seventh day is a sabbath of solemn rest, holy to the LORD; whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death.

Is the answer in the Book to kill those who work on the sabbath,

who is gay,

who eats lobster, shrimp, oysters, clams and scallops?

Please get real into the 21st century Naz and get out of the stone age for Christ sakes.

Thanks Bob, I’ll put that on my list. It’s a big list but that is one of the things (ie. flood) I want to review.

LeoTheGreater, as you know most observe Sunday thanks to Rome’s change but a few still keep Saturday. I agree with the Apostle Paul regarding Holy Days. My concern comes in when it’s made a mortal sin to not keep a Holy Day. Watch out, Sunday Laws are being pushed and that won’t be good no matter who agrees with it.

I don’t celebrate Easter or Christmas. I personally remember His death on Nisan 14th and His birth during the Feast of Tabernacle. I don’t keep a weekly day of rest per say. I may be a descendant of Jacob (Israel) but I’m not a member of Judaism. I drink the new wine of the Second Covenant which can be squished into one commandment – be like Jesus Christ.

Jesus/Yahshua said this, “Truly, truly, I say to you, we speak of what we know and testify of what we have seen, and you do not accept our testimony. If I told you earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things?” (John 3:11-12)

As Dr. John Lennox points out when it comes to determining our origin it all boils down to two critical viewpoints, those being, the naturalistic or the theistic and in the case of many that means Christian theism and the One Eternal God of the Bible.

As Professor Walter Veith states in all fairness there’s no way to shut down the controversy by shutting one side (the theist worldview) out of the discussion:

The LORD/YHWH says, “in every place where I cause My name to be remembered, I will come to you and bless you.” (Exodus 20:24b)

Remember the pdf. on Biblical Hermeneutics from post # 214. you promised you’d eventually get to; well, when you do I suggest you be sure to go here:

BIBLICAL HERMENEUTICS. 533
CHAPTER XXXI.

ALLEGED CONTRADICTIONS OF SCIENCE.
Statement of allegations and issues.
It has been alleged that the statements of Scripture and the results
of scientific research are in numerous instances opposed
to one another. The charge appears to have begotten
in some devout minds a suspicion and fear that scientific
research in the realm of nature is essentially hostile to religion.
On the other hand, there are those who seem to labour under a conviction
that the doctrine of a supernatural revelation, and a life
nourished by faith in a personal God, are inimical to the scientific
investigation of the laws and processes of nature and of life.
Others, again, have affirmed that the Bible was not given to teach us
natural science; that its great purpose is to teach morals and religion,
to instruct us in righteousness; and that, therefore, we need not be
disturbed if we do occasionally find its statements in conflict with
discoveries in science. Others have attempted various methods of
“reconciling” science and the Bible, and these have generally acted
on the supposition that the results of scientific discovery necessitate
a new interpretation of the Scripture records, or call for
new principles of interpretation. The new discoveries, they say,
do not conflict with the ancient revelation; they only conflict with
the old interpretation of the revelation. We must change our hermeneutical
methods, and adapt them to the revelations of science.
How for the thousandth time have we heard the story of Galileo
and the Inquisition.
Fundamental considerations.
We may well pause in the presence of these grave allegations
and issues, and consider a few self-evident propositions.
It is not to be supposed that any fact of nature or history
can be in conflict with the express declarations of the omniscient
God. If there be an apparent conflict it must be that there
is some mistake or misunderstanding about the fact or about the
revelation. For it may be either that the fact alleged is not as
stated, or that the revelation has been misapprehended. If the
alleged fact is clear beyond all question, and yet stands in certain
conflict with a statement of divine revelation, it would furnish
valid ground for believing that that which purported to be a
revelation of God was spurious. Truths of whatever kind can
never be in real conflict with each other. And it is unworthy of a

534 PRINCIPLES OF
Christian believer to be disturbed with a fear that any well-established
fact or law of nature can harm the interests of true religion.
We may welcome light and knowledge from whatever source, confident
that the truth of God must and will stand all possible investigation
and trial. Hasty natures, however, indulging in pride of
intellect, or given to following the dictum of honoured masters,
may fall into grievous error in either of two ways: They may
shut their eyes to facts, and hold to a delusion in spite of evidence;
or they may become the obsequious victims of “science falsely so
called.” That certainly is a false science which is built upon inferences,
assumptions, and theories, and yet presumes to dogmatize as
if its hypotheses were facts. And that is a system of hermeneutics
equally false and misleading which is so flexible, under the pressure
of new discoveries, as to yield to the putting of any number of new
meanings upon an old and common word. The interests of science
and religion alike require that we do no violence to the facts
of the one, or the written records of the other.
The principal points on which Science and the Bible have been
thought to be in conflict may be briefly considered under three
heads: (1) The record of miracles, (2) Descriptions of physical phenomena,
and (3) The origin of the world and of man. A brief
discussion of these will show how large a proportion of the alleged
contradictions are based upon needless assumptions.

FRank:
A brief discussion of these will show how large a proportion of the alleged
contradictions are based upon needless assumptions. (by theists).

And you citing:

“The LORD/YHWH says, “in every place where I cause My name to be remembered, I will come to you and bless you.” (Exodus 20:24b)”

This is nothing more than a Politician’s Promise to the people and could just as easily be edited to say”

The Theocratic Politician declares that “The LORD/YHWH says: “…………” because that is what Theocracy Politicians claimed, declared, said, warned, promised, etc….. whenever they spoke about their FigureHead; that’s just the way they talked, crediting or debiting as they went. When Moses talked to God or listened to God it was only through a prophet, another person, a sage, a minister, priest, religion’s authority figure schooled in the way of Theocratic Government. God never talked to people, never listened to people; others had dreams or visions in their imaginative mind and exercised their profession accordingly like a Judge when he receives his appointment; like a lawyer when hired by the Crown to prosecute or a lawyer when hired as the Defense.

So all your quote does is to show what the promise was stated to be to the people who obeyed the recognized authority of religion speaking on behalf or religion’s FigureHead.

That’s all it means…a Politician’s Promise and we know how useless most of those can become. It was no different in stoneagism as the bible clearly proves.

“In religion, the only thing that matters at the end of the day is that Church Dogma rules the congregation not the God Myth they created.” ltg

All things created and invented by man, is for man and there is nothing in the human experience that man did not create, imagine, invent, compose or bring forth, even the God of his choice for brainwashing purposes of the next generation as soon as they are born to have the “Mark” indelibly seared onto another proselyte’s unformed putty-like brain, an abuse that begins at birth designed to last a lifetime…..When, Son of Man, will this child abuse end?

This concept was clearly demonstrated when Jesus was accosted by the Pharisees: “Look, why do they do what is not lawful on the Sabbath?”

25 But He said to them, “Have you never read what David did when he was in need and hungry, he and those with him: 26 how he went into the house of God in the days of Abiathar the high priest, and ate the showbread, which is not lawful to eat except for the priests, and also gave some to those who were with him?” “The Sabbath was made for man,(by man for man’s religious ritualism) but man was not made for the Sabbath. 28 So the Son of Man(and all humanity) is Lord even of the Sabbath.”

WITHOUT children to indoctrinate religion would fail and cease to exist. Clergy in every religion clamor and scurry and protest whenever somebody suggests religion should not be taught in the education system to children until children reach the age of majority; until then, it should be banned, like tobacco, alcohol and firearms.

HELP IS ON THE WAY:
The Quebec, Canada Provincial government banned religious teaching in the daycare centres it subsidizes.

It should be obvious why the Quebec government wants to ban religious teaching in all publicly subsidized daycares and schools. In a country as diverse as Canada and in the ever-increasingly diverse province of Quebec, it is absurd for the government to sponsor any form of religious indoctrination.
But this decision, announced by Quebec Family Minister Yolande James in December, was not as obvious to some. According to an article in The Globe and Mail on the matter, there have been various complaints on the grounds that the new policy violates peoples’ religious rights.

This policy does not stop anybody from teaching religion in daycares; the only thing this policy changes is the eligibility of these daycares to receive public funding. The last time I checked, getting paid by the government to indoctrinate children has nothing to do with one’s religious rights.

Beyond the undeniable legal validity of this decision, it should be common sense that in the Western world public dollars should not fund religious teaching, especially to children as young as toddlers.

There is certainly nothing wrong with teaching children about different cultures and religions of the world in an effort to promote tolerance and enlightenment, but this must be dealt with seriously and conscientiously before a certain age. Young children can’t be expected to have the sufficient critical thinking and decision-making skills with which to evaluate information given to them by authority figures in their lives.

In any case, establishing a dialogue about religion so early in a child’s life ought to be left up to the parents.

There is simply too big a risk of early educators confusing children with loaded language based on their own religious beliefs and biases.

If a family wants to give their child a religious education, that is a personal decision that begins in the home and in their respective religious community. And furthermore, parents who do not elect to raise their child in any religion should not be placed in the awkward position of having to undo the damage when their children get home from daycare wondering why mommy and daddy don’t take them to church.

Most importantly, allowing indoctrination into public daycares is bound to lead to an element of alienation for those children who are not a part of the religion being instructed.

It is difficult enough being different from other children—be it a non-religious child amongst religious children or a religiously-raised child among children of a different faith—without having the teacher express bias in favour of some and against others on top of it.

Especially in the earliest stages of education, establishing a safe, inclusive environment for all students is essential, and that simply cannot be done when such biases are introduced into the classroom. Those complaining would do well to take this opportunity to instruct children on tolerance and critical thinking in a world that seems, far too often, to lack both.

Should we sing “Silent Night” in our school play? Can we tell the children stories about Eid al-Adha? Are we allowed to teach them about the Sabbath?
The government is answering no to all these questions. This June, public daycares in Quebec are banned from giving religious instruction to young students.

The new law states that any religious education or school plays, arts and crafts, prayers, and songs involving religion are no longer permitted. If everyone has a right to their beliefs, why is the government marginalizing religious families?

The decision will not outlaw religion from private intuitions, but religious families will now have to pay substantially more for daycares that allow religious teachings.

Parents currently pay $7 a day for public daycare. On the other hand, the cost for unsubsidized private daycares, such as the YMCA’s, can go as high as $38. Regardless of the fact that daycares with a religious focus will still exist, the difference in tuition would be too much of a financial burden for some parents.

Religious families, who will send their kids to private daycare, can end up paying up to $744 extra a month.

This is basically what the new ban is countering; now we don’t have a say in what our kids learn. The enforcing of secularism brings the government into what should be a family decision. Parents who send their kids to religious daycares are well aware of what they are taught.

The fact that they sent them there in the first place means this is what they chose. Otherwise they would have sent them to a regular daycare. Parents want their kids to be exposed to their religion from a very young age.

If you are a dedicated Catholic or Muslim family, you too would probably prefer if your children knew who Jesus or Allah is.

Daycare workers will be allowed to say their prayers but not permitted to make children recite them.
Religious leaders including rabbis, imams and priests will no longer be allowed to visit daycare centres.
And while religious symbols such as crucifixes will still be allowed, they cannot be used as an educational tool.

Some say rules go too far, others say not far enough.

The Association of Jewish Daycares refused comment until it can properly examine the new policy, but the head of the Muslim Council of Montreal sees the new rules as an affront to religious freedom.

“We consider this an infringement on the rights of religious communities to educate their children according to our constitution and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms of Quebec,” said Salam Elmenyawi, adding his organization would support any subsidized daycare that wants to fight the new rules in court.

Families critic Carole Poirier said Friday the government announcement did not go far enough.
For instance, Poirier pointed out that the new guidelines would not forbid day care centres from selecting children based on the religion of their parents.

Here’s a question: is it fair for the government to take your hard-earned tax-money and give it to someone else to teach little children an ideology you don’t believe in? If you are a Muslim parent, do you feel comfortable that your money is being spent indoctrinating kids in Judaism or Christianity? What if you were atheist?

The issue here is not about the pros and cons of teaching kids about religion or even only their religion at an early age, or whether or not parents should have a choice to teach it to their kids. That is up to the parents. The parents should have the choice (and the government is not taking that away).

Taking tax-payer money to fund religious daycares is enforcing a person to pay to teach something that they might not only not believe in, but totally disagree with.

Religion can be taught at home. Religion can be taught in the Church. If the religious want to have their kids taught religion in daycare, they should put the money up themselves. No one is stopping a specific religious community or churches from funding the daycares themselves. No one is stopping a religious group from helping out the less-fortunate make religious daycare more affordable.

The religious groups and communities should quit shirking their responsibility to their faith if they really do believe in it, and put their money where their mouth is, instead of taking it from someone else.

Amen…..and it’s about time that the grown adults stop expecting that the Government should pay for the brainwashing of their children with religious teachings while tax payers pay for it…..

I finally returned to my reading last week and just started on the hermeneutics book. At your request, I skipped ahead to the science vs. religion chapter. I’ll read it again later, but I have a few initial impressions of what I have read so far, impressions which are certainly subject to correction if my understandings are inaccurate. I would welcome any input explaining where I have gone astray.

First, it is my impression that accurate scripture interpretation first requires accurate textual criticism, with word translations that mirror as closely as possible the original Hebrew and Greek meanings. I almost wish I had taken you up on your suggestion to learn Hebrew and Greek, but I don’t believe there are enough years remaining in my life to do that justice so I will thus rely on the scholarship of others to make those associations for me. With that in mind, I would like to reference Naz’ post #242 citing Hebrews 11:3. This verse appears to be a favorite of creationists, where modern day translations of the verse use the word “universe”, thus allowing the creationists to imply a scriptural allusion to the creation of the universe by God. Older King James translations use the word “worlds” in place of universe. I don’t know how the 1st century author of Hebrews interpreted the word worlds, but I suspect it was nothing like how we today interpret the word universe. I’m a bit out of my element on this, but one can go further still and suggest that even the word worlds is a mistranslation of the original Greek text, altering the meaning of the verse even further:

If the translations are subject to debate then I have a hard time seeing how the scriptural interpretation can be accurate. Is the goal a “historically” accurate interpretation of scripture from the original Hebrew and Greek meanings of the words, or a personal interpretation, more along the lines of Jewish midrash, that brings meaning to one’s personal situation? Help me out here.

Second, I found it refreshing that Terry attempted to allow for the validity of scientific discoveries by not taking a literal interpretation of scripture. Describing Joshua’s stopping the sun as poetic license, allowing for a localized, eye witness explanation for the Flood and not making a literal 24 hour day interpretation of the 6 “days” of creation makes it easier to overlay science and scripture.

Third, I was amused by Terry’s acceptance of scientists who are willing to allow for miracles as an explanation of natural events, in sharp contrast with his disdain for those who practice an “infidel” version of science, which I take to mean those who exclude the God hypothesis from their scientific studies. I have no idea what the ratio of infidel to non-infidel scientists was in the 1880s, but I suspect Terry would not be pleased by how the vast majority of today’s scientists apply the scientific method.

I have identified a couple of books in my local public library system which are a bit more current in their view of hermeneutics and will add those to my reading list. I find the subject interesting enough to pursue further. Maybe they will provide a perspective on an overlap between science and religion similar to that of Terry, but I am skeptical of that. The science – religion divide has become increasingly polarized in recent times, which in my opinion, results from the failure of the intellectual elite on both sides of the argument to make a sincere effort to understand the opposing point of view.

I share the view that organized religion is a product of the human intellect. My reading of history tells me religions grew out of a desire by a few, for lack of a better term, do-gooder prophets to quell the violence that was occurring when humanity transitioned from a hunter-gather existence to settled farming communities. The prophets taught a Golden rule version on the ethic of reciprocity as a substitute for the perpetual eye-for-an-eye violence that existed between the nomads and the settlers. This subsequently evolved into sets of guidelines (the Ten Commandments, the Rig Vedas, the Precepts, etc.) for the purpose of establishing a more delineated moral basis for personal interactions with one’s neighbors. There’s nothing wrong with any of that; moral behavior in society is a good thing.

Hitchins wrote that sending one’s children to Sunday school amounted to child abuse. I wouldn’t go that far. The Greek philosophers believed the individual could achieve a higher plane of moral existence by extensive philosophical study and reflection. I think that is impractical, especially if one is trying to scratch out an existence in the Indus valley while surrounded by marauding raiders, or working to simultaneously pay your mortgage, your children’s college education and set aside money for your health needs in old age. I personally don’t believe religion is required to lead a moral existence, but that’s just me. There needs to be a method on instilling moral education in children, and adults for that matter. If others feel society needs religious guidance, in order to achieve a higher level of moral interactions between groups and individuals, I’m okay with that.

“The science – religion divide has become increasingly polarized in recent times, which in my opinion, results from the failure of the intellectual elite on both sides of the argument to make a sincere effort to understand the opposing point of view.”

However it is worth noting that the divide is growing in polarity IMO because Science advancement thrives while ancient stoneage religion cannot move from its centuries old tradition; it is a like dead language that cannot and will not move at the risk of exposing its irrelevance in the first place.

I submit that the divide is not the result “from the failure of the intellectual elite on both sides of the argument to make a sincere effort to understand the opposing point of view.”

It is simple enough to understand the opposing view without being an intellectual elite. I understand the “supernatural opposing side” and my life studies have pursued an attempt to fathom the opposing side with all the knowledge available, not only in the world of Science, but common sense dictates that interpretation must take into account, connotation, context, metaphors and similes, parables, sayings, cultural and tradition, idioms, such that somebody was speeding like a bat out of hell, or a bat out of a bell! But what I cannot understand is how they do not “get it”!

The tide parts bodies waters around the world twice a day: It doesn’t take the whack of a staff to start the parting, it’s gravity! The highest and lowest tides in the world can be found in Canada at the Bay of Fundy, which separates New Brunswick from Nova Scotia.

At some times of the year the difference between high and low tide in this Bay is 16.3 meters,(53.5 feet) higher than a three-story building. In Saint John New Brunswick the tide is so forceful; AKA, the Reversing Falls, going one way at high tide and the other way at low tide and looks exactly like a flowing river in both directions, swirling eddies, ripplings, swift currents, white water and all. IN fact it is a flowing river that travels 450 miles through New Brunswick emptying into the Bay of Fundy. The Reversing Rapids is a unique phenomenon created by the collision of the Bay of Fundy’s monstrous tides and the mighty St. John River.

Religions are like the Pyramids of Egypt, where they are stuck there they stay.

If other need religion for a moral guidance I’m okay with that too….but

But religion is more than just a belief for moral guidance, “religion wants to impose a universal morality which is why it has always attracted the kind of person who thinks other people’s private lives are their business. And giving respect to this mentality is exactly what’s got us into the mess that we’re in.

We’ve given religion ideas that are above its station and we persuaded it that it’s something it’s not. When the truth is that faith is nothing more than the deliberate suspension of disbelief. It’s an act of will. It’s not a state of grace; it’s a state of choice. Because without evidence, you’ve got no reason to believe apart from your willingness to believe.

So why is that worthy of respect anymore than your willingness to poke yourself in the eye with a pencil? And why is faith considered some kind of virtue, is it because it implies a certain depth of contemplation and insight? I don’t think so.

Faith by definition is unexamined, so in that sense it has to be among the shallowest of experiences and yet if it could it would regulate every action, every word and thought of every single person on this planet.

Well, I think religion pollutes our understanding of reality. It gets in the way. And it brings out the worse in the best of us so that we’re even prepared to stoop so low as to poison the unformed mind of the people we love the most, our children. By the time they’re old enough to think for themselves, it’s too late. They’ve been well and truly, hypnotized. If you fill your child’s mind with images of satan and the horrors of hellfire, you’re a sick individual and you are mentally ill. And the only reason you don’t know this is because you’ve been indulged for far too long by people and institutions that really ought to know better.

The truth is that religious beliefs are infantile, scriptures are embellished imaginations and gods are illusions. And I can say that with all due respect because no respect is actually due. If you deserved respect, you’d already have it. You would be rolling around in it like a televangelist, in other people’s money.

In the meantime, I don’t believe that god exists but if it turns out that I’m wrong about that, well, fair enough. But if god exists, I want him to tell me, himself, I don’t want to hear it from anybody else.” pcondell

In the first draft of my response to Frank I was less diplomatic, blaming the rift between science and religion on Bible literalists and those who espouse a distorted version of scripture. I don’t have a lot of respect for pseudo scientists who distort the application of the scientific method to accommodate their religious convictions, but I have even less respect for those who claim the planet is 6000 years old and dinosaurs went for a ride in Noah’s ark. However, as I continued to edit my response, I recalled some of the disparaging commentary on religion that I have read from the likes of Dawkins, Hitchins and Coyne. Reading and responding to the posts on this website the past 4 years has made me much more sympathetic to the atheist point of view (probably not what Jason intended), but there is no reason not to be diplomatic. There is a portion of society that takes great comfort from their religious convictions, a point of view that the more aggressive atheists will never take the time to understand. Sometimes both sides are maddeningly intolerant of the other point of view.

Bob, good point on your last post. I echo your thoughts from the opposite viewpoint.

I don’t have a lot of respect for Christians who would taint the gospel and misrepresent it to unbelievers. But I have even less respect for scientists who try to tell me that matter came from nothing and organized itself as a random process over billions of years.

In the end, both sides need to tolerate the other so we can live peacefully, however, both sides will never agree with the other since they are opposing belief systems.

So whether it’s dinosaurs taking a ride on Noah’s ark or humans coming from a pond of goo, take your pick….each side is claiming fantastic things that they must believe to be true to hold to their viewpoint.

I appreciate your first impressions having decided to take a look at Biblical Hermeneutics’ chapter XXXI. What made an immediate impression on me was seeing hermeneutics itself considered as science. I’m in agreement with this approach for this indeed is what the Bible teaches [1 Thessalonians 5:21]. We’re always encouraged even exhorted to carefully examine and test the full range of our life’s experiences to make truthful determinations. For centuries theology has served as a driving force for many probing minds to search for understanding & wisdom in both the seen and unseen realms. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theology

The Bible doesn’t teach that for it to be correctly understood one should rely upon his own interpretation, especially for prophecies (which constitute a significant portion of God’s Word). In fact the apostle Peter specifically emphasizes that matter [2 Peter 1:20]. True Scriptural understanding comes from inspiration from God Himself [2 Peter 1:21; Luke 24:13-53]. What’s important and effective is that we remain open to God’s calling and receptive to Him. This does require faith/trust on our part towards God. Hebrews 11:3 YLT (Young’s Literal Translation) uses the word “ages”. I’m no Hebrew language scholar by any means but I do recall reading that in ancient Hebrew there is no word for “universe” as we use that term today. Hebrew uses a term which we translate as “the heavens and the earth” to convey that idea. So in one translation we read “world” and in another we read “ages”. I can conceive of that as what we’d call in these modern times “space-time” with all that entails. For me the object of the exercise is to obtain a sound interpretation of Scripture. To do that I search out & apply what I conclude to be honest reliable sources of information concerning Biblical writings such as Dr. Peter Williams, Dr. John Lennox, Dr. Michael Heiser, the Dead Sea Scrolls and other sources some of which I’ve suggested to you previously; I make it my primary aim to go wherever I can be taught of God [John 6:45]. Now think of another verse in that passage Naz referenced from Hebrews. And without faith [trust] it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is and that He is a rewarder of those who seek Him. (Hebrews 11:6) Isn’t that reasonable? For how are we to communicate in any meaningful way with our loving Father if we won’t offer Him our genuine trust? Could any relationship between two sentient beings ever rest on anything less than that? 1 John 4:14-16, 19.

I’m convinced God & science can relate to each other in a coherent, cohesive even complimentary manner:

As Dr. Lawrence Principe notes, “The idea that scientific and religious camps have historically been separate and antagonistic is rejected by all modern historians of science.” Nevertheless, the idea that science and religion are in conflict remains extremely popular, thanks to certain politically motivated works written in the 1800s and a variety of more recent claims (most notably by the “new atheists”). Yet even a brief consideration of the views of the leaders of the scientific revolution and of history’s most important scientists shows not only that belief in God is quite prevalent among scientists, but also that it has been a driving force in their discoveries. This video presents a number of quotes to illustrate the truth about the relationship between science and religion.

More than that, I count all things to be loss because of the surpassing value of the knowledge of Christ Jesus/Messiah Yahshua my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them but rubbish so that I may gain Christ/Messiah, and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from the Law, but that which is through faith in Christ/Messiah, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith, that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection and participation in His sufferings, being conformed to His death; in order that I may attain to the resurrection from the dead. (Philippians 3:8-11)

You should ask yourself why you quote Paul more than Jesus? Why you quote other preachers and ministers without mentioning Jesus’ words and life. We do not need or want what Paul thinks or other preachers think; it’s the life and messages of Jesus himself.

It is the most unredeeming factor in your life and in the countless lives of others who hear preachings extolling the words of Paul whose understanding was and is, slim to none, other than blind obedience to clergy authority, the same blind obedience Paul was brought up as a Pharisee to preach to other weakened minds, without the Father through whom one is to know the Son and therefore without the Son through whom we know that Father within and thereby remain ignorant without knowledge of the Son but tons of belief and faith in the non-knowledge of every Tom, Dick and Harry charlatans for pence and power, accolades, high seats, to be known of men. You have your reward.

The problem stems from your lack of knowledge about Jesus but plenty of faith and knowledge of what other preachers interpret the same old tired expressions of: “Christ Jesus/Messiah Yahshua my Lord”, well-stated in Proverbs 26:11 and reinforced by Jesus himself when he said: ” ‘These people honor Me with their lips, but their hearts are far from Me. They worship Me in vain; they teach as doctrine the precepts of men.’”…
And that is all you teach, the precepts of men like Paul et al.

Get Jesus in your life and in your words and in your thoughts and in your communications, THEN, you will be on track to learn of him and to put him in his rightful place, within you, revealing the Father by the Son and revealing the Son by the Father.Then, who do you think you are being? The Son. Plain and simple.

Paul had nothing in common with Jesus or his message, not the least of which was understanding of what the life of Jesus and his messages meant to those who do.

Proverbs 6:23 is only half right…reproofs are the way of life but the lamp and the light of the law is the Old Mosaic School; i.e., the Ten Commandments(the Ten Observations that Moses researched) were capital offenses but the penalty of death has been replaced over the centuries as obsolete in more than half of the world’s countries; there are 195 countries in the world.

103 have abolished it for all crimes;
6 have abolished it, but retain it for exceptional or special circumstances (such as crimes committed in wartime);
49 retain it, but have not used it for at least 10 years or are under a moratorium;
37 retain it in both law and practice.

Of the countries generally considered to be in the Western society (relatively wealthy, stable functional democracies with well-educated populations), just five countries continue to perform capital punishment: the United States, Japan, Singapore, St. Kitts & Nevis, and Taiwan. In South Korea, there is a moratorium.

The European Union holds a strong position against the death penalty; its abolition is a key objective for the Union’s human rights policy. Abolition is also a pre-condition for entry into the Union. In Europe, only Belarus continues to execute people.

“Jesus Christ’s response to the Pharisee’s question shows that He divided the Ten Commandments into two sections or tables.”

The Berean interpretation about how Jesus divided the Ten Commandments erroneously lulls and misleads. Did Jesus even mention the Ten Commandments? No. Jesus alluded to behavior by referencing the 1st-Love of God(the God within you); 3rd- “lip service” that people pay in the vain attempt of men using the name God while their hearts are from from God; 4th-“the Sabbath”, he said, “was made for man not man for the Sabbath”. Jesus only vaguely referenced graven imagery when He talked about Moses lifting up the serpent in the wilderness, not as a graven image to worship but as a warning: to be alert in prayer lest it befalls you unawares as evils slithers to infiltrate the complacent.

“No other Gods”, Graven Image, Sabbath, has only got to do with precepts of clerics, only the 5th has anything to do with love (honor) for Mother and Father and the last 5 Commandments speak not of love but about contravening social behavior; they do not mean you love someone because you don’t kill them, falsely accuse them, steal or covet what they have. Obedience to laws governing behavior doesn’t mean you have the grace of love abiding within you.

This idea of how Jesus viewed the Ten Commandments by mentioning “Love of God and Neighbor” are political correct talking points for clergy and you walk right in and swallow it up hook, line and sinker. They do your convenient thinking for you so if it’s good enough for them, it’s good enough for you.

Let’s consider a matter referenced in posts #s 239, 241, 243, 257, and 261 of this blog; i.e., a universal catastrophic flood. If in fact this fundamental idea were refuted cogently by modern day science there would have to be a rational explanation for some rather basic common and not so common occurrences.

Of chalk deposits, paleocurrents, petrified forests, Surtsey Island & the Icelandic flood of 1996; or how it was in the days of Noah:

It is not me but you, who is associating with clerical nonsense; otherwise, you would not be posting videos by 119 Ministries and other similar ministry videos from Christian perspectives like this recent reason video. Even it’s website states its cleric ministry roots: http://www.Acts17.net

Naturalists, as David Wood calls atheists, are not without ideas of causes beyond our current ability of understanding but that doesn’t prove that supernatural personal relationships with the Gods are true to anybody except yourself.

Using magic tricks to prove your Gods doesn’t work either; nor does hiring actors to mimic diseases and miracles of pretending to be cured of ailments.

Just because there are life forces we cannot understand, roots that follow paths to water with finger fibres to root out nutrients from the soil composition or the processes that turn sun energy into chlorophyll and why this synthesis is important for plant growth and oxygenation of the atmosphere doesn’t mean we know the primary purpose of the Life Forces.

O2 not only gives us life but destroys also the harmful bacteria in our bodies without affecting the beneficial bacteria that we need. No antibiotic or drug can make that claim.

The theist says: “I believe that God’s plan for mankind was for us to lead a physically productive life in a clean environment, following His dietary laws and not require drugs to remain healthy…our bodies would then receive the sustenance it needs.”

The atheist says: “”I do not know the reason for life or where it is going or why it is going so we surround ourselves with all the knowledge we can discover about the Life Forces so we may know the answers to the questions we do not know at this time.”

However we are not prepared to swallow the hocus pocus supernaturalism of religion’s belief in the “god” explanation that does not explain but imagines. If the discovery explorers accepted the God Theory, knowledge would cease and life would be worse than merely useless except for the sensory pleasures we receive by the knowledge through conscious reality. All baby mammals are playful and happy, why?

While there are various God theories, since the days of mythology and religious tangents in all cultures, we continue to pursue reason as far as we are able until we discover the knowledge of our Raison D’etre and not just individually but Humanity as a whole; however, using God to explain Reason or using Reason to explain God is perfunctory and an easy way out without lifting a brain cell and I reject belief as infinitely inferior to the freedom that knowledge gives to the seeker who finds it.

After watching the video I searched the story of David Wood and found his oration describing his former lifestyle very compelling in the way that his life was turned around.

In his teens, Wood attempted to kill his father with a hammer. He was committed to a psychiatric hospital by his mother where he was diagnosed with an anti-social personality disorder. Wood was later transferred to jail by the state of Virginia. While in jail Wood confessed to the attack and subsequently served a 10 year prison sentence for malicious wounding.

Wood, formerly considering himself an atheist, converted to Christianity while serving his prison sentence which is not uncommon in a prison setting. Whether the conversion is true or used as a pretense to gain parole, only that person knows the treasure of his heart or one may believe by the works that he eventually performs, as Jesus said in John 14:11 If you don’t believe me, at least believe the works that I do.

Personally I do not believe David Wood was an atheist BECAUSE OF THE LIFE HE LED, that caused him to be arrested, jailed and committed to a psychiatric hospital for trying to kill his father with a hammer to the head. He may have been an Antichrist or the English derivative, Anarchist, but he was not an Atheist.

David Wood may say now that he was an atheist then because he has become a Christian Apologist but Wood is using the term “Atheist” only to denigrate Atheists by trying to link his ungodly (inhumane) past life behavior to Atheism. This is compelling too because Wood shows himself to be an unjust accuser and quite possibly a Jesus loving, Christian hypocrite.

I submit that the majority of Atheists do not hate all people or try to kill their fathers for disciplining them as children and for telling them what to do. Atheists do care about other people and do not want to kill everybody who disagrees with them.

Atheists too proclaim good news to the poor, liberty to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind; they attempt to set at liberty those who are oppressed and imprisoned by religious tyranny as well as freedom from the tyranny of brutal earthly regimes. Atheists cry for their children and grieve for loved ones lost, feed the hungry, offer goodwill and hope to the downtrodden, provide care and medicine, are first responders, respect the sanctity of life and the preservation thereof, work alongside Christians and others of religious faith as Doctors without borders, police protectors and the military and share a common humanity.

So please don’t try to denigrate parts of humanity you disagree with and drive the world farther apart than it already is. There are groups that indiscriminately kill and slaughter their fellow-man, fellow-woman and fellow-children but Atheists are not one of those groups. Your video does not show a role model but a Christian Apologetics wannabee Clergy minister in his new found career of choice.

Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience. (Ephesians 5:6)

Case in point – Sam Harris:

***UPDATE*** Sam Harris responded: “I meant that Quran asserts Jesus wasn’t divine. I misspoke.” Odd to give a reply about Jesus’ deity when Colbert was talking about the virgin birth, but it’s entirely possible to misspeak while the cameras are rolling and you don’t have much time to think about what you’re saying.http://www.acts17.net
Sam Harris recently said that he wants to correct every error he’s ever made, and that people should send him any errors they find in his works. One of Sam’s errors was made on “The Colbert Report,” where he insisted that, according to the Quran, anyone who believes in the virgin birth of Jesus will spend eternity in hell. Since Islam affirms the virgin birth of Jesus, we can only wonder how much Sam really knows about the religions he discusses in his books.

Taboo to criticize religion. Respect other religions? We do not respect people’s beliefs, we evaluate their reasons and we decide if the reasons are justified in our world view. So to say we must respect all religions is pure caca del toro.

All things in moderation includes religious moderation-sharris

Sam Harris also said that the Christianity’s Creator hated homosexuals and called for their deaths and so it does and the reason Westboro Christian Church calls for the same thing at fallen gay soldiers whose gunerals they deliver their foul-mouth, brain-dead, “Unholy” call for death against gays using the bible to justify their idiocy because it is written in the “Holy Book”. You know it’s there, and so do I and why most of the Christian Community can’t tolerate homosexuals whether they were born that way or not. Some of us have moved on from ancient barbarism and many can’t move on because they too are chiseled in brain-dead grey matter stone.

Now when Sam Harris gave this speech in Toronto Canada at the Ideas 2005 Convention, among other points of speak, he was spoke about the difference between religious moderation and religious fundamentalism when religious moderates in fact become blinkered by there own moderation and like the religious fundamentalists will take passages from Jesus sayings, out of context and bastardize the words to suit their own perspective. As an example of that he quoted the saying from a religious fundamentalist who said we love death like you love life and christians also can take words out of context and use the words Jesus said as fundamental beliefs such as Jesus said in the Parable of the ten minas about the man having been given his kingship but his enemies would not accept the king and therefore said bring my enemies before me and kill them. That was the way things were done in first century society so the parable was easily understood but fundamentalists would use the out-of-context phrase to justify killing their enemies giving God the credit or debit as the case may be.

So your video of fact checking Sam Harris is a bunch of baloney by a disrespectful idiot looking to denigrate atheists but he is intellectually bankrupt.

It’s often imagined that atheists are, in principle, closed to spiritual experience, but the truth is, there’s nothing that prevents an atheist from experiencing self transcending love or ecstasy or rapture or awe. In fact there’s nothing that prevents an atheist from going into a cave for a year or a decade and practicing meditation like a proper mystic. What atheists don’t tend to do is make unjustified and unjustifiable claims about the cosmos on the basis of those experiences.

There’s no question that disciplines like meditation and prayer can have a profound effect on the human mind. But do the positive experiences of, say, christian mystics over the ages suggest that Jesus is the sole savior of humanity? Not even remotely, because christians have been having these experiences but so have buddhists, so have muslims and even atheists. So there’s a deeper reality here and it makes a mockery of religious denominations.

The fact is that whenever human beings make an honest effort to get at the truth they reliably transcend the accidents of their birth and upbringing. It would be absurd to speak of christian physics, though the christians invented physics, and it would be absurd to speak of muslim algebra although the muslims invented algebra. It will one day be absurd to speak of christian or muslim ethics or spirituality.

Whatever is true about our ethical and spiritual circumstance in ethical and spiritual terms is discoverable now. And can be articulated without offending all that we have come to understand about the nature of the universe. And certainly without making divisive claims about the unique sanctity of any book, or pegging these most beautiful features of our lives to rumors of ancient miracles.

There’s this notion that atheism is responsible for the greatest crimes in the 20th century. It is amazing how many people think the crimes of Hitler and Pol Pot and Mao were because of atheism. This a total misconstrual of those societies and of the psychological and sociological forces that allowed people to follow their dear leader over the brink. The problem with fascism and communism was not that they were too critical of religion, the problem is they’re too much LIKE religion.

Rick Warren suggested that North Korea was a model atheistic society. The truth is North Korea is organized exactly like faith based cult. Centered on the worship of Kim Jong Il. North Koreans apparently believe that the shipments of food aid that they receive from us to keep them from starving to death are actually devotional offerings to Kim Jong Il. Is too little faith the problem with North Korea? Is too much skeptical inquiry what is wrong here?

Auschwitz, the Gulag and the Killing Fields are not the product of atheism, they are the product of other dogmas run amuck: Nationalism, political dogma. Hitler did not engineer a genocide in Europe because of atheism, in fact Hitler doesn’t even appear to have been an atheist, he regularly invoked Jesus in his speeches. But that’s beside the point. He did it on the basis of other beliefs: dogmas about Jews and the purity of German blood.

The history of Muslim jihad however, does have something to do with Islam. The atrocities of September 11th did have something to do with what 19 men believed about martyrdom and paradise. The fact that we’re not funding stem cell research at the federal level does have something to do with what Christians believe about conception and the human soul.

It’s important to focus on the specific consequences of specific ideas. I want to make it very clear that I am not holding religion responsible for every bad thing that a religious person has done in history to be balanced against all the bad things that atheists have done. I am only holding religion responsible for what people do and will continue to do explicitly for religious reasons. (Sam Harris).

Just as there are three essential elements a fire needs to ignite, those being, heat, fuel and an oxidizing agent (usually oxygen); there are three essential elements required to produce jihad:

Many people are confused by jihad. If Islam is a religion of peace, why is there a persistent problem of radicalism in the Muslim world? If Islam is the problem, why are there so many peaceful Muslims? In this video, David Wood explains that jihad isn’t the product of a single factor, but of three factors: belief, knowledge, and obedience. These three factors come together in what we’ll call “The Jihad Triangle.”

In Mark 10:45, Jesus declares: “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” He adds in John 10:14-18:

“I am the good shepherd; I know my sheep and my sheep know me—just as the Father knows me and I know the Father—and I lay down my life for the sheep. I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd. The reason my Father loves me is that I lay down my life—only to take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord. I have authority to lay it down and authority to take it up again. This command I received from my Father.”

His disciple John later said that “he appeared so that he might take away our sins” (1 John 3:5).

Jesus’ sacrificial death gives rise to one of the most common Muslim objections to Christianity: Wouldn’t it be unfair or unjust for God to punish Jesus for the sins of others? However, if Muslims think that this is a good objection, they apparently haven’t read their own sources.

Let’s take a closer look at this objection.

Therefore, He was obligated to be like His brethren in all things, so that He might become a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people. (Hebrews 2:17)

http://www.answeringmuslims.com
The Qur’an affirms the inspiration, preservation, and authority of the Christian scriptures (see Qur’an 3:3-4, 5:43-47, 5:68, 6:114-115, 7:157, 10:94, 18:27, etc.). Hence, Muslims who take the Qur’an seriously should also take the Bible seriously.

Here are four Bible verses every Muslim needs to know:

Luke 9:22—“The Son of Man must suffer many things and be rejected by the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed and be raised up on the third day.”

Mark 10:45—“For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.”

John 6:40—“For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.”

Matthew 28:19—“Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit.”

Very few Christians know what the incarnation of Jesus signified let alone what it signified to humanity.

In fact Christians do not even know what the Transfiguration signified in Matthew, Mark and Luke. They still regurgitate the religious scholar’s dogma who hid knowledge from them and they in turn hide it from everybody else because they simply don’t know the truth, other than “traditional knowledge and fulfilling the law”. And incapable of recognizing this truth.

Why?

Because “Woe to you lawyers! You religious scholars. For you have taken away the key of knowledge. You did not enter in yourselves, and those who were entering in you hindered.”

THAT IS: taken away this key, i.e. they have by means of their teaching opposed, as it is, to the saving truth (and only directed it to traditional knowledge and fulfilling of the law), and thereby made the people incapable of recognizing this truth.

And you all have been indoctrinated by this falsity and while declaring you understand Jesus, you do not . you continue to perpetuate the hidden keys of knowledge without discretionary insight to discover it for yourself lest you wander from the indoctrinate of your upbringing and stray into lost territory.

Trying to feed scriptural understanding to others is like grasping at straws and clutching the wind. You are not even close to dissemination without the understanding that must necessarily go with it.

The question that has puzzled me for the past couple of years is why religious fundamentalists so vehemently reject the scientific, archeological and scriptural scholarship evidence that refutes a literal interpretation of the Bible. In the West it is mostly Protestants who have such a telescopic view of human existence, ignoring everything outside the narrow view finder of their scriptural vision, but one can make the same argument for devout Muslims. I have concluded that attempting to logically argue for a more encompassing viewpoint is a futile exercise so I have switched my approach and have recently begun an effort to merely try to understand their point of view. Some of what Frank suggests for my afternoon reading program is relevant to that effort and some is not. It’s easy enough to recognize the “forced feedings”.

Ph.D. (2004), University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI; Department of Hebrew and Semitic
Studies; minor in Classical Studies. My dissertation was entitled, “The Divine Council in Late
Canonical and Non-Canonical Second Temple Jewish Literature.” The dissertation involved exegesis
primarily in the Pentateuch, Wisdom Literature, and Isaiah, but also dealt at length with Israelite
Religion (all stages) and Second Temple texts. Supervisor: Michael V. Fox

M.A. (1998), University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI; Department of Hebrew and Semitic
Studies

For He was foreknown before the foundation of the world, but has appeared in these last times for the sake of you who through Him are believers in God, who raised Him from the dead and gave Him glory, so that your faith and hope are in God. (1 Peter 1:20-21)

Violence can only be concealed by a lie, and the lie can only be maintained by violence.
Hastiness and superficiality are the psychic diseases of the 20th century, and more than anywhere else this disease is reflected in the press.
– Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

In “Islam Unveiled,” Robert Spencer dares to face the hard questions about what the Islamic religion actually teaches–and the potentially ominous implications of those teachings for the future of both the Muslim world and the West. Going beyond the shallow distinction between a “true” peaceful Islam and the “hijacked” Islam of terrorist groups, Spencer probes the Koran and Islamic traditions (as well as the history and present-day situation of the Muslim world) as part of his inquiry into why the world’s fastest growing faith tends to arouse fanaticism. “Islam Unveiled” evaluates the relationship between Islamic fundamentalism and “mainstream” Islam; the fixation with violence and jihad; the reasons for Muslims’ disturbing treatment of women; and devastating effects of Muslim polygamy and Islamic divorce laws. Spencer explores other daunting questions–why the human rights record of Islamic countries is so unrelievedly grim and how the root causes of this record exist in basic Muslim beliefs; why science and high culture died out in the Muslim world–and why this is a root cause of modern Muslim resentment. He evaluates what Muslims learn from the life of Muhammad, the man that Islam hails as the supreme model of human behavior. Above all, this provocative work grapples with the question that most preoccupies us today: can Islam create successful secularized societies that will coexist peacefully with the West’s multicultural mosaic?

“Ultimately, there is only one way for us to come together. It must happen at a personal level. We must learn to truly love one another.
The Prophet Muhammad is reported to have said: ‘You will not enter paradise until you believe, and you will not believe until you love one another.’ Jesus said, ‘Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you and persecute you.'”

While it may be comforting, following a tragedy, to think that Muhammad commanded people to love one another, is this what Muhammad actually meant?

In this video, David Wood examines Muhammad’s words to assess their true worth and impact.

http://www.answeringmuslims.com
The most popular argument for Islam is that Islam must be the true religion because it’s spreading so rapidly. But can we really conclude that a religion is true based on rapid growth? In this video, David Wood cites a Pew Research study to show that the reasons Islam is rapidly expanding have little to do with its being true (in fact, just the opposite). For the studies cited in this video, click the following links:

The most popular argument for Islam is that Islam must be the true religion because it’s spreading so rapidly. But can we really conclude that a religion is true based on rapid growth? In this video, David Wood cites a Pew Research study to show that the reasons Islam is rapidly expanding have little to do with its being true (in fact, just the opposite).

Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel was a Tunisian Muslim living in France. After suddenly becoming more devout in his Islamic faith, Bouhlel drove a truck into a crowd of men, women, and children, who were celebrating Bastille Day in the city of Nice on July 14, 2016. Bouhlel’s family and friends have questioned his sincerity by pointing out that he didn’t pray, didn’t fast, ate pork, drank alcohol, etc. However, since many recent terrorist attacks in France have been carried out by Muslims who once lived very un-Islamic lifestyles, perhaps we need to take a closer look at the relationship between Islam, bad Muslims, and terrorism. In this video, David Wood examines this relationship, and finds that France has produced a recipe for endless terrorist attacks.

http://www.answeringmuslims.com
Terrorist attacks have been so frequent lately that I simply can’t make videos quickly enough to keep up with the jihadis. So, I put together some template videos that I can use again and again as terrorists slaughter their victims. Since there was a terrorist attack in Kabul, Afghanistan earlier today, I decided to use one of my templates.

http://www.answeringmuslims.com
Just hours after a Syrian refugee in Germany hacked a woman to death with a machete, another Syrian refugee in Germany blew himself up outside a music festival.

The volatile refugee who introduced multicultural Germany to the culture of suicide bombing had been denied asylum a year earlier, but was still living in Germany and was in no immediate danger of being deported due to the ongoing Syrian Civil War.

Since he had a backpack but no ticket, security fortunately turned him away from the concert. After pacing back and forth on the street, the refugee detonated his bomb, killing himself and injuring fifteen others.

http://www.answeringmuslims.com
Earlier today, two jihadis stormed a church in Saint-Etienne-du-Rouvray, France, with knives and a fake bomb. They forced a Catholic priest to his knees and filmed themselves slashing his throat at the altar. They later shouted “Allahu Akbar” while police shot them to death.

Prior to the attack, French police had caught one of the jihadis repeatedly attempting to travel to Syria to join ISIS. Nevertheless, he was free to roam the streets of France, as long as he wore an electronic bracelet.

Even worse, French authorities knew that the church was being targeted by ISIS, since an ISIS hit list found in 2015 named the church as a target.

Given the circumstances, do French authorities bear some of the blame for the outcome of the attack? In this video, David Wood explores the issue.

Deuteronomy 12

28 Be careful to obey all these words that I command you, that it may go well with you and with your children after you forever, when you do what is good and right in the sight of the LORD your God. 29 “When the LORD your God cuts off before you the nations whom you go in to dispossess, and you dispossess them and dwell in their land, 30 take care that you be not ensnared to follow them, after they have been destroyed before you, and that you do not inquire about their gods, saying, ‘How did these nations serve their gods?—that I also may do the same.’ 31 You shall not worship the LORD your God in that way, for every abominable thing that the LORD hates they have done for their gods, for they even burn their sons and their daughters in the fire to their gods.
32 “Everything that I command you, you shall be careful to do. You shall not add to it or take from it.” (Deuteronomy 12:28-32)

Series exploring the coming New World Order from a Biblical perspective. In this part, we have reached the Reformation and the struggle to get the Word of God into the hands of ordinary men and women in a language they can understand. Through this, we learn an extremely important principle: control of the information flow means control of people.

Series exploring the coming New World Order from a Biblical perspective. In this part we complete our look at the development of the Bible and take inspiration from the Reformers as we realise how important it is for Christians to stand against manipulation and intimidation, and to keep speaking the truth in love, whatever the cost.

http://www.answeringmuslims.com
Many people in the West are wondering what causes jihad. CNN anchor Brooke Baldwin invited Christopher Dickey, foreign editor of the Daily Beast, to explain. According to Mr. Dickey, terrorism has nothing to do with Islam. Instead, terrorism is the result of three factors: (1) testosterone, (2) identifying with an oppressed group, and (3) a desire for fame. Is he right? In this video, David Wood shows that CNN is once again whitewashing jihad.

http://www.answeringmuslims.com
CNN’s Tom Foreman attempted to explain the tactics of ISIS. Instead of examining the commands of Allah and Muhammad, however, Foreman discussed the Vikings, Vlad the Impaler, Hitler, Stalin, and the Khmer Rouge. Can we take this network seriously when they go to this extent to avoid important topics? David Wood examines Foreman’s claims.

“30 take care that you be not ensnared to follow them……………….. and that you do not inquire about their gods, saying, ‘How did these nations serve their gods?……………..31 You shall not worship the LORD your God in that way, for every abominable thing that the LORD hates they have done for their gods, for they even burn their sons and their daughters in the fire to their gods.

32 “Everything that I command you, you shall be careful to do. You shall not add to it or take from it.”

By Posting a series of videos exploring the Religion, the Messenger, the God and the Symbol?

5 For you may be sure of this, that everyone who is sexually immoral or impure, or who is covetous (that is, an idolater), has no inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God. 6 Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience. 7 Therefore do not become partners with them; 8 for at one time you were darkness, but now you are light in the Lord. Walk as children of light 9 (for the fruit of light is found in all that is good and right and true), 10 and try to discern what is pleasing to the Lord. 11 Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them. 12 For it is shameful even to speak of the things that they do in secret.13 But when anything is exposed by the light, it becomes visible, 14 for anything that becomes visible is light. Therefore it says,
“Awake, O sleeper,
and arise from the dead,
and Christ will shine on you.”
15 Look carefully then how you walk, not as unwise but as wise, 16 making the best use of the time, because the days are evil. 17 Therefore do not be foolish, but understand what the will of the Lord is. (Ephesians 5:5-17)

Luke 8

1 Soon afterward He went on through cities and villages, proclaiming and bringing the good news of the kingdom of God. And the twelve were with Him, 2 and also some women who had been healed of evil spirits and infirmities: Mary, called Magdalene, from whom seven demons had gone out, 3 and Joanna, the wife of Chuza, Herod’s household manager, and Susanna, and many others, who provided for them out of their means. And when a great crowd was gathering and people from town after town came to Him, He said in a parable, 5 “A sower went out to sow his seed. And as he sowed, some fell along the path and was trampled underfoot, and the birds of the air devoured it. 6 And some fell on the rock, and as it grew up, it withered away, because it had no moisture. 7 And some fell among thorns, and the thorns grew up with it and choked it. 8 And some fell into good soil and grew and yielded a hundredfold.” As He said these things, He called out, “He who has ears to hear, let him hear.” And when His disciples asked Him what this parable meant, 10 He said, “To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of God, but for others they are in parables, so that ‘seeing they may not see, and hearing they may not understand.’ 11 Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God. 12 The ones along the path are those who have heard; then the devil comes and takes away the word from their hearts, so that they may not believe and be saved. 13 And the ones on the rock are those who, when they hear the word, receive it with joy. But these have no root; they believe for a while, and in time of testing fall away. 14 And as for what fell among the thorns, they are those who hear, but as they go on their way they are choked by the cares and riches and pleasures of life, and their fruit does not mature. 15 As for that in the good soil, they are those who, hearing the word, hold it fast in an honest and good heart, and bear fruit with patience.
“No one after lighting a lamp covers it with a jar or puts it under a bed, but puts it on a stand, so that those who enter may see the light. 17 For nothing is hidden that will not be made manifest, nor is anything secret that will not be known and come to light. 18 Take care then how you hear, for to the one who has, more will be given, and from the one who has not, even what he thinks that he has will be taken away.” Then His mother and His brothers came to Him, but they could not reach Him because of the crowd. 20 And He was told, “Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, desiring to see You.” 21 But He answered them, “My mother and My brothers are those who hear the word of God and do it.” (Luke 8:1-21)

Qur’an 9:123—O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness.

Qur’an 48:29—Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and those who are with him are severe against disbelievers, and merciful among themselves.

Qur’an 98:6—Verily, those who disbelieve (in the religion of Islam, the Qur’an and Prophet Muhammad) from among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians) and Al-Mushrikun will abide in the Fire of Hell. They are the worst of creatures.

Sahih Muslim 33—”I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah.”

Qur’an 5:51—O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people.

Sahih Muslim 4366—It has been narrated by ‘Umar b. al-Khattab that he heard the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) say: I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and will not leave any but Muslim.

Qur’an 2:223—Your women are your tilth, so come into your tillage how you choose; but do a previous good act for yourselves, and fear God, and know that ye are going to meet Him; and give good tidings unto those who do believe.

Qur’an 2:282— . . . and call in to witness from among your men two witnesses; but if there are not two men, then one man and two women from among those whom you choose to be witnesses, so that if one of the two errs, the second of the two may remind the other . . .

Sahih al-Bukhari 2658—The Prophet said: “Isn’t the witness of a woman equal to half of that of a man?” The women said: “Yes.” He said: “This is because of the deficiency of her mind.”

Qur’an 70:29-30—And those who guard their private parts, except in the case of their wives or those whom their right hands possess—for these surely are not to be blamed,

Sahih Muslim 3249—Jabir b. Abdullah reported: We contracted temporary marriage giving a handful of dates or flour as a dower during the lifetime of Allah’s Messenger and during the time of Abu Bakr until Umar forbade it in the case of Amr b. Huraith.

Ibn Ishaq, p. 106—[Muhammad said:] Now none of God’s creatures was more hateful to me than an (ecstatic) poet or a man possessed: I could not even look at them. I thought, Woe is me poet or possessed—Never shall Quraysh say this of me! I will go to the top of the mountain and throw myself down that I may kill myself and gain rest.

Sahih al-Bukhari 3175—Aisha narrated: “Once the Prophet (the blessing and peace of Allah be upon him) was bewitched so that he began to imagine that he had done a thing which in fact, he had not done.”

Sahih al-Bukhari 5134—Narrated Aishah that the Prophet wrote the marriage contract with her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: “I have been informed that Aisha remained with the Prophet for nine years (i.e. till his death).”

Sahih al-Bukhari 5158—Narrated Urwa: The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).

Qur’an 4:3—And if ye fear that ye will not deal fairly by the orphans, marry of the women, who seem good to you, two or three or four; and if ye fear that ye cannot do justice (to so many) then one (only) or (the captives) that your right hands possess. Thus it is more likely that ye will not do injustice.

Qur’an 3:32—Say: Obey Allah and the Apostle; but if they turn back, then surely Allah does not love the unbelievers.

Published on Jul 31, 2016http://www.answeringmuslims.com
Seth Dunn is a Christian blogger who writes for “Pulpit and Pen,” a website founded by JD Hall that claims to promote “discernment.” Dunn recently posted an article titled: “Resetting the Evangelical Mindset on Nabeel Qureshi.” Since Dunn’s hit piece on Nabeel Qureshi is filled with blunders, we can only wonder how the writers for “Pulpit and Pen” have convinced themselves that they are champions of “discernment.”

In this video, David Wood goes through Dunn’s entire article, point by point, showing that Dunn’s attacks against Nabeel Qureshi are based on sheer ignorance. Because Dunn is planning to run for President of the Southern Baptist Convention, his lack of discernment should be a concern for Christians.

Published on Jun 16, 2016
The Christian faith requires you to take up your cross and follow Jesus and can sometimes mean losing friends, dividing families, or life as you know it to walk in the path of God. Nabeel Qureshi shares how Jesus and his lived example provides a unique answer to our suffering. Learn more about the Why? Series here: http://rzim.org/the-why-series

Published on Aug 1, 2016http://www.answeringmuslims.com
The Washington Post recently posted an article titled: “Six-Year-Old Afghan Girl Reportedly Sold in Marriage.” The article claims that child marriage is an Afghan tribal practice that violates the teachings of Islam. Apparently, writers at the Washington Post have never studied Islam. In Islam’s most trusted sources on the life of Muhammad, we read:

Sahih Muslim 3480—It was narrated that Aishah said: “The Prophet married me when I was six years old, and consummated the marriage with me when I was nine years old.”

Sahih Muslim 3482—It was narrated from Aishah that: “The Messenger of Allah married her when she was six years old and consummated the marriage with her when she was nine years old, and he died when she was eighteen years old.”

Published on Aug 2, 2016
Pope Francis was recently asked about violence in Islam. The Pope replied:

“I don’t like to speak of Islamic violence, because every day, when I browse the newspapers, I see violence, here in Italy… this one who has murdered his girlfriend, another who has murdered the mother-in-law… and these are baptized Catholics! There are violent Catholics! If I speak of Islamic violence, I must speak of Catholic violence . . . and no, not all Muslims are violent, not all Catholics are violent. It is like a fruit salad; there’s everything. There ARE violent persons of this religion… this is true: I believe that in pretty much every religion there is always a small group of fundamentalists. Fundamentalists. We have them. When fundamentalism comes to kill, it can kill with the language — the Apostle James says this, not me — and even with a knife, no? I do not believe it is right to identify Islam with violence. This is not right or true.”

Is this a fair response? In this video, David Wood examines an important difference between violence in Catholicism and violence in Islam.

Published on Mar 30, 2013http://www.answeringmuslims.com
Muslims often ask where Jesus claimed to be God. Here’s a simple response. The Qur’an refers to Allah as “the First and the Last” (57:3). Similarly, in the Old Testament, God calls himself “the First and the Last” (Isaiah 44:6). In the New Testament, however, Jesus claims to be “the First and the Last” (Revelation 1:17). Why would Jesus claim to be God?

Published on Nov 6, 2014
How many times have we heard it said that the Pharisees followed the law? What if we said that wasn’t true? Well, it’s not true. This teaching will shed some light on the topic.

Published on Aug 4, 2016http://www.answeringmuslims.com
A recent MSN headline for an article in The Guardian suggested that Muslim asylum seekers in Greece are being forced to convert to Christianity. The article, however, simply reported that two Christian aid workers gave copies of the Gospel of John to some Muslims at the camp. Why would the media suggest that Muslims were being forced to convert when they were only being given copies of a single book of the Bible? David Wood examines the media bias.

Published on Aug 6, 2016http://www.answeringmuslims.com
Nearly fourteen centuries ago, a man named “Muhammad” violently subjugated Arabia. The key to victory, according to Muhammad, was terrorism. In Sahih al-Bukhari 2977, Muhammad declared:

“I have been made victorious with terror.”

Earlier today, in Charleroi, Belgium, a devout follower of Muhammad shouted “Allahu Akbar” as he hacked two female police officers with a machete. A third police officer shot and killed the man.

As these attacks become a way of life in Europe, our leaders remain thoroughly convinced that there’s absolutely no connection between Muslims terrorizing their enemies in their quest for victory, and Muhammad declaring that terrorism is the key to victory.

Perhaps the real key to the success of terrorists is the stupidity of their enemies.

• Three Days & Three Nights
• Jonah: In the Belly of the Great Fish
• Yahushua: In the Heart of the Earth
• Yahushua… Crucified on the Sixth Day
• Yahushua… Resurrected on the First Day
• When does the count begin?

Published on Aug 9, 2016
Muslims have been told by their leaders and apologists that there is only one Qur’an, and that it has been perfectly preserved, down to the letter, from the time it was revealed to Muhammad. Unfortunately, for Muslims, this claim is factually false. To prove that it’s false, Hatun Tash and Jay Smith brought 26 different Arabic Qur’ans to Speaker’s Corner in London.

Jay and Hatun took each of the 26 Arabic Qur’ans, and they showed Muslims the many differences which can be found within each of them, proving that the Qur’an has not been perfectly preserved.

As you will see in the video, the Muslims who gathered were extremely angry with Jay and Hatun for showing them so many textual variants in the Qur’an. The Muslims began with questions, then tried to change the subject, then became enraged as the differences were read to them.

Once Hatun and Jay began to show how the differences weren’t simply readings, but textual differences that changed the meaning of Qur’an verses, some of the more prominent Muslims at Speakers’ Corner began calling the rest of the Muslims to leave the ladder area and no longer listen to Jay and Hatun. They realized that what was being shown was indeed too damaging for Muslims to hear, since it completely destroys one of the most popular myths of Islam.

A group formed about 20 feet away, where one of the leaders tried to explain away what was being shown from the ladder, but the damage had already been done. With hard evidence on display, one cannot simply explain it away.

The Pfander team has never seen this kind of reaction as was shown on Sunday, proving that this new material is indeed damaging to Islam, and especially to the authority of the Qur’an.

Because much of what Hatun and Jay are showing is very technical and thus difficult to explain in such a public setting, the two of them made a second hour-long video, sitting on a couch with all of the 26 Qur’ans next to them, in a studio, which gave them the ability to unpack and explain the background to the thousands of variants which are being found.

Published on Jul 1, 2013http://www.answeringmuslims.com
Muslims often ask where Jesus claimed to be God. According to both the Bible and the Qur’an, God is the final judge of all people. Yet in Matthew 25:31-46, Jesus claims to be the final judge of all people. Since Jesus makes a claim that only God can truly make, Jesus clearly claimed to be God.

The word “Trinity” does not appear anywhere in the Bible. For this reason, many people think that it is a false doctrine, created by the early church leaders. However, the word “gravity” is also not used anywhere in the Bible, although the concept is illustrated throughout. Despite all the protests, the doctrine of the Trinity is the overarching theme throughout the entire Bible. So, although God consists of three persons (Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, often referred to as the “Godhead”), God is One. If God were merely a construct of this universe, such an idea would be a contradiction. However, God’s transcendence explains the paradox. People who fail to comprehend the true nature of God either

1. Degrade or deny two members of the Godhead
2. Deny the Oneness of God (i.e., become polytheists)

* * * * *
“I am the LORD/YHWH, and there is no other;
Besides Me there is no God.” (Isaiah 45:5)

9
“I kept looking
Until thrones were set up,
And the Ancient of Days took His seat;
His vesture was like white snow
And the hair of His head like pure wool.
His throne was ablaze with flames,
Its wheels were a burning fire.
10
“A river of fire was flowing
And coming out from before Him;
Thousands upon thousands were attending Him,
And myriads upon myriads were standing before Him;
The court sat,
And the books were opened.
11 Then I kept looking because of the sound of the boastful words which the horn was speaking; I kept looking until the beast was slain, and its body was destroyed and given to the burning fire.
12 As for the rest of the beasts, their dominion was taken away, but an extension of life was granted to them for an appointed period of time.
13
“I kept looking in the night visions,
And behold, with the clouds of heaven
One like a Son of Man was coming,
And He came up to the Ancient of Days
And was presented before Him.
14
“And to Him was given dominion,
Glory and a kingdom,
That all the peoples, nations and men of every language
Might serve Him.
His dominion is an everlasting dominion
Which will not pass away;
And His kingdom is one
Which will not be destroyed….
27 Then the sovereignty, the dominion and the greatness of all the kingdoms under the whole heaven will be given to the people of the saints of the Highest One; His kingdom will be an everlasting kingdom, and all the dominions will serve and obey Him.’ (Daniel 7:9-27)

* * * * *
If Jesus Is God, Why Did He Call Himself the Son of Man?
August 18th, 2016
By Dr. Hugh Ross

I have met a lot of skeptics and cultists who assert that Jesus never claimed to be God. Rather, they say he referred to himself as the son of man. It is not just skeptics and cultists who are troubled by this issue. I have met just as many Christians who ask, “If Jesus is the Son of God, why did he so consistently refer to himself as the son of man?” The common follow-up question is how can I be certain that Jesus is really God and that the Trinity is a correct doctrine?

* * * * *
Hebrews 6:17-20.

17 In the same way God, desiring even more to show to the heirs of the promise the unchangeableness of His purpose, interposed with an oath,
18 so that by two unchangeable things in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have taken refuge would have strong encouragement to take hold of the hope set before us.
19 This hope we have as an anchor of the soul, a hope both sure and steadfast and one which enters within the veil,
20 where Jesus/Yahshua has entered as a forerunner for us, having become a high priest forever according to the order of Melchizedek.

1
Thus says the LORD,
“Preserve justice and do righteousness,
For My salvation is about to come
And My righteousness to be revealed.
2
“How blessed is the man who does this,
And the son of man who takes hold of it;
Who keeps from profaning the sabbath,
And keeps his hand from doing any evil.”
3
Let not the foreigner who has joined himself to the LORD say,
“The LORD will surely separate me from His people.”
Nor let the eunuch say, “Behold, I am a dry tree.”
4 For thus says the LORD,
“To the eunuchs who keep My sabbaths,
And choose what pleases Me,
And hold fast My covenant,
5
To them I will give in My house and within My walls a memorial,
And a name better than that of sons and daughters;
I will give them an everlasting name which will not be cut off.
6
“Also the foreigners who join themselves to the LORD,
To minister to Him, and to love the name of the LORD,
To be His servants, every one who keeps from profaning the sabbath
And holds fast My covenant;
7
Even those I will bring to My holy mountain
And make them joyful in My house of prayer.
Their burnt offerings and their sacrifices will be acceptable on My altar;
For My house will be called a house of prayer for all the peoples.”
8
The Lord GOD, who gathers the dispersed of Israel, declares,
“Yet others I will gather to them, to those already gathered.”

* * * * *

Matthew’s Gospel structure: a Messianic reflection on Isaiah
by James Patrick
March 7, 2009

Hagner follows his introduction to structure in Matthew’s Gospel with a section on use of the Old Testament, and notes here (pp. liv-lv) that apart from the numerous allusions to Old Testament passages, Matthew has included over sixty explicit quotations of Old Testament texts, “more than twice as many as any other gospel”. The quotations are clearly understood to be about Jesus, therefore assuming a (Jewish-Christian?) audience that would have known these prophecies and their relevance to Jesus. Hagner says that Matthew obviously believed the “totality” of the story of Jesus “to be understood as the fulfilment of what God had promised in the Scriptures”. Even so, he somewhat disappointedly admits, “The placement of the quotations in the book does not help us to discern the structure of the Gospel…” Here I am afraid I must disagree.

* * * * *
Matthew 5

5:1 When Jesus saw the crowds, He went up on the mountain; and after He sat down, His disciples came to Him.
2 He opened His mouth and began to teach them, saying,
3 “Blessed are those who are not spiritually arrogant, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
4 “Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted.
5 “Blessed are the gentle, for they shall inherit the earth.
6 “Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be satisfied.
7 “Blessed are the merciful, for they shall receive mercy.
8 “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God.
9 “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.
10 “Blessed are those who have been persecuted for the sake of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
11 “Blessed are you when people insult you and persecute you, and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of Me.
12 Rejoice and be glad, for your reward in heaven is great; for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.
13 “You are the salt of the earth; but if the salt has become tasteless, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled under foot by men.
14 “You are the light of the world. A city set on a hill cannot be hidden;
15 nor does anyone light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on the lampstand, and it gives light to all who are in the house.
16 Let your light shine before men in such a way that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven.
17 “Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill.
18 For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished.
19 Whoever then annuls one of the least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
20 “For I say to you that unless your righteousness surpasses that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of heaven.

(20) And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: (21) Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you. (KJV)

Theologians may argue over the interpretation of words, but Jesus’ own testimony undoubtedly implies that the Kingdom of God was in their presence in His Person and ministry. Therefore, the last phrase of Luke 17:21 should be translated as, “The kingdom of God is among you.” Barnes’ Notes, Tyndale New Testament Commentary, Expositor’s Bible Commentary, The New International Biblical Commentary, and The Interpreter’s Bible all agree on this conclusion. He was in their midst, and He was within the Kingdom of God.

* * * * *
Jesus answered, “My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, then My servants would be fighting so that I would not be handed over to the Jews; but as it is, My kingdom is not of this realm.” (John 18:36)

Trying to excise the Father within you as a misinterpretation is a bunch of bullcrap. How many times did Jesus have to say it of himself:

“Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me? The words I say to you I do not speak on my own authority. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work.”

“the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works.”

The word was made flesh, said John, and we beheld his glory. The reflected glory of his father, indwelling his humanity, manifesting himself, as God, through Jesus Christ as man. John 12:45: He that has seen me has seen him that sent me. So he was the truth about God. He interpreted deity. In the physical, visible body of his humanity he gave not only a physical, visible expression of his own invisible self but an invisible self intimately identified with his invisible father who indwelt his humanity in the person of the holy spirit and whom he allowed from within his human spirit gain total access to his human soul so that the father through the holy spirit could teach his mind, so control his emotions that the father in the son would direct his will and govern his behavior. So the Lord Jesus constantly testified: John 5: 19; John 5:30; “Without my father I can do nothing”.

Don’t you believe Philip that I am in my father and my father is in me? And the words that I speak unto you, I speak not of myself; the father who lives in me; he does the work; everything I do, he does; everything I say, he says; everything I am, he is. That’s why when you look at me you see him. Because you see, the Lord Jesus was not only the truth about God.
Now if ever there was a man who walked this earth who knew the truth about a man’s humanity and that relationship that must govern that man’s humanity, with God and God with him, that man was Jesus Christ.

Hear me out and don’t be confused. As to the relation of the Father to those who genuinely trust in/accept His Son Jesus Christ/Yahshua Messiah:
1 John 2
21 I have not written to you because you do not know the truth, but because you do know it, and because no lie is of the truth.
22 Who is the liar but the one who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one who denies the Father and the Son.
23 Whoever denies the Son does not have the Father; the one who confesses the Son has the Father also.
24 As for you, let that abide in you which you heard from the beginning. If what you heard from the beginning abides in you, you also will abide in the Son and in the Father.
25 This is the promise which He Himself made to us: eternal life.
26 These things I have written to you concerning those who are trying to deceive you.
27 As for you, the anointing which you received from Him abides in you, and you have no need for anyone to teach you; but as His anointing teaches you about all things, and is true and is not a lie, and just as it has taught you, you abide in Him.
28 Now, little children, abide in Him, so that when He appears, we may have confidence and not shrink away from Him in shame at His coming.
29 If you know that He is righteous, you know that everyone also who practices righteousness is born of Him.

As to the Kingdom of God/Messiah’s Millennial Reign upon planet Earth:
Matthew 6
5 “When you pray, you are not to be like the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and on the street corners so that they may be seen by men. Truly I say to you, they have their reward in full.
6 But you, when you pray, go into your inner room, close your door and pray to your Father who is in secret, and your Father who sees what is done in secret will reward you.
7 “And when you are praying, do not use meaningless repetition as the Gentiles do, for they suppose that they will be heard for their many words.
8 So do not be like them; for your Father knows what you need before you ask Him.
9 “Pray, then, in this way:
‘Our Father who is in heaven,
Hallowed be Your name.
10
‘Your kingdom come.
Your will be done,
On earth as it is in heaven.
11
‘Give us this day our daily bread.
12
‘And forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors.
13
‘And do not lead us into temptation, but deliver us from evil. [For Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.’]
14 For if you forgive others for their transgressions, your heavenly Father will also forgive you.
15 But if you do not forgive others, then your Father will not forgive your transgressions.

Furthermore, Matthew 13
13:1 That day Jesus went out of the house and was sitting by the sea.
2 And large crowds gathered to Him, so He got into a boat and sat down, and the whole crowd was standing on the beach.
3 And He spoke many things to them in parables, saying, “Behold, the sower went out to sow;
4 and as he sowed, some seeds fell beside the road, and the birds came and ate them up.
5 Others fell on the rocky places, where they did not have much soil; and immediately they sprang up, because they had no depth of soil.
6 But when the sun had risen, they were scorched; and because they had no root, they withered away.
7 Others fell among the thorns, and the thorns came up and choked them out.
8 And others fell on the good soil and yielded a crop, some a hundredfold, some sixty, and some thirty.
9 He who has ears, let him hear.”
10 And the disciples came and said to Him, “Why do You speak to them in parables?”
11 Jesus answered them, “To you it has been granted to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been granted.
12 For whoever has, to him more shall be given, and he will have an abundance; but whoever does not have, even what he has shall be taken away from him.
13 Therefore I speak to them in parables; because while seeing they do not see, and while hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand.
14 In their case the prophecy of Isaiah is being fulfilled, which says,
‘YOU WILL KEEP ON HEARING, BUT WILL NOT UNDERSTAND;
YOU WILL KEEP ON SEEING, BUT WILL NOT PERCEIVE;
15
FOR THE HEART OF THIS PEOPLE HAS BECOME DULL,
WITH THEIR EARS THEY SCARCELY HEAR,
AND THEY HAVE CLOSED THEIR EYES,
OTHERWISE THEY WOULD SEE WITH THEIR EYES,
HEAR WITH THEIR EARS,
AND UNDERSTAND WITH THEIR HEART AND RETURN,
AND I WOULD HEAL THEM.’
16 But blessed are your eyes, because they see; and your ears, because they hear.
17 For truly I say to you that many prophets and righteous men desired to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it.
18 “Hear then the parable of the sower.
19 When anyone hears the word of the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what has been sown in his heart. This is the one on whom seed was sown beside the road.
20 The one on whom seed was sown on the rocky places, this is the man who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy;
21 yet he has no firm root in himself, but is only temporary, and when affliction or persecution arises because of the word, immediately he falls away.
22 And the one on whom seed was sown among the thorns, this is the man who hears the word, and the worry of the world and the deceitfulness of wealth choke the word, and it becomes unfruitful.
23 And the one on whom seed was sown on the good soil, this is the man who hears the word and understands it; who indeed bears fruit and brings forth, some a hundredfold, some sixty, and some thirty.”
24 Jesus presented another parable to them, saying, “The kingdom of heaven may be compared to a man who sowed good seed in his field.
25 But while his men were sleeping, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went away.
26 But when the wheat sprouted and bore grain, then the tares became evident also.
27 The slaves of the landowner came and said to him, ‘Sir, did you not sow good seed in your field? How then does it have tares?’
28 And he said to them, ‘An enemy has done this!’ The slaves said to him, ‘Do you want us, then, to go and gather them up?’
29 But he said, ‘No; for while you are gathering up the tares, you may uproot the wheat with them.
30 Allow both to grow together until the harvest; and in the time of the harvest I will say to the reapers, “First gather up the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them up; but gather the wheat into my barn.”’”
31 He presented another parable to them, saying, “The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed, which a man took and sowed in his field;
32 and this is smaller than all other seeds, but when it is full grown, it is larger than the garden plants and becomes a tree, so that THE BIRDS OF THE AIR come and NEST IN ITS BRANCHES.”
33 He spoke another parable to them, “The kingdom of heaven is like leaven, which a woman took and hid in three pecks of flour until it was all leavened.”
34 All these things Jesus spoke to the crowds in parables, and He did not speak to them without a parable.
35 This was to fulfill what was spoken through the prophet:
“I WILL OPEN MY MOUTH IN PARABLES;
I WILL UTTER THINGS HIDDEN SINCE THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD.”
36 Then He left the crowds and went into the house. And His disciples came to Him and said, “Explain to us the parable of the tares of the field.”
37 And He said, “The one who sows the good seed is the Son of Man,
38 and the field is the world; and as for the good seed, these are the sons of the kingdom; and the tares are the sons of the evil one;
39 and the enemy who sowed them is the devil, and the harvest is the end of the age; and the reapers are angels.
40 So just as the tares are gathered up and burned with fire, so shall it be at the end of the age.
41 The Son of Man will send forth His angels, and they will gather out of His kingdom all stumbling blocks, and those who commit lawlessness,
42 and will throw them into the furnace of fire; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
43 Then THE RIGHTEOUS WILL SHINE FORTH AS THE SUN in the kingdom of their Father. He who has ears, let him hear.
44 “The kingdom of heaven is like a treasure hidden in the field, which a man found and hid again; and from joy over it he goes and sells all that he has and buys that field.
45 “Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a merchant seeking fine pearls,
46 and upon finding one pearl of great value, he went and sold all that he had and bought it.
47 “Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a dragnet cast into the sea, and gathering fish of every kind;
48 and when it was filled, they drew it up on the beach; and they sat down and gathered the good fish into containers, but the bad they threw away.
49 So it will be at the end of the age; the angels will come forth and take out the wicked from among the righteous,
50 and will throw them into the furnace of fire; in that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
51 “Have you understood all these things?” They said to Him, “Yes.”
52 And Jesus said to them, “Therefore every scribe who has become a disciple of the kingdom of heaven is like a head of a household, who brings out of his treasure things new and old.”
53 When Jesus had finished these parables, He departed from there.
54 He came to His hometown and began teaching them in their synagogue, so that they were astonished, and said, “Where did this man get this wisdom and these miraculous powers?
55 Is not this the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary, and His brothers, James and Joseph and Simon and Judas?
56 And His sisters, are they not all with us? Where then did this man get all these things?”
57 And they took offense at Him. But Jesus said to them, “A prophet is not without honor except in his hometown and in his own household.”
58 And He did not do many miracles there because of their unbelief.

Hebrews 3:15-18
(15) while it is said: ” Today, if you will hear His voice,
Do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion.”
(16) For who, having heard, rebelled? Indeed, was it not all who came out of Egypt, led by Moses? (17) Now with whom was He angry forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose corpses fell in the wilderness? (18) And to whom did He swear that they would not enter His rest, but to those who did not obey?

Hebrews 4:2
(2) For indeed the gospel was preached to us as well as to them; but the word which they heard did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in those who heard it.

Put in another way, if a person continues to sin because God’s Word does not motivate him to obedience to what He teaches, then he, in a worst-case scenario, either does not believe God or at this point his belief is so weak that he cannot bring himself to trust Him. Such are the ones who died in the wilderness. The weakness is not that people do not believe that He exists, but that they do not trust what He says because, in reality, they do not know Him. Thus, in the biblical sense, they have not yet truly heard.

* * * * *
You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe—and shudder! (James 2:19)

Published on Sep 8, 2016http://www.answeringmuslims.com
The Hajj (pilgrimage to Mecca) is one of the Five Pillars of Islam. Every Muslim who is physically and financially able to perform the Hajj must do so at least once in life. The Hajj takes place annually during the last month (Dhu al-Hijjah) of the Islamic lunar calendar.

Many Muslims, however, fail to realize that the pilgrimage to Mecca was once a pagan practice, and that many of the traditions associated with the Hajj have pagan origins. In this video, David Wood explores the Muslim sources to discover the truth about the Hajj.

Published on Jul 6, 2013
Calling all Atheists. Bible prophecy has been fulfilled, over and over again. There are End Time prophecies that will soon come to pass. You all owe it to yourselves to research this as you so open-mindedly read a book telling you being an Atheist is the answer.

Christian apologists Hope Chest are replete with frauds and forgeries and Christians themselves can hardly babe expected to express authenticity simply because Christians believe the frauds and forgeries of early Christian insertions into the record.

TACITUS:

Regarding Christian desperation for evidence of the existence of Christ, Dupuis comments that true believers are “reduced to look, nearly a hundred years after, for a passage in Tacitus” that does not even provide information other than “the etymology of the word Christian,” or they are compelled “to interpolate, by pious fraud, a passage in Josephus.” Neither passage, Dupuis concludes, is sufficient to establish the existence of such a remarkable legislator and philosopher, much less a “notorious impostor.”

It is evident that Tacitus’s remark is nothing more than what is said in the Apostle’s Creed—to have the authenticity of the mighty Christian religion rest upon this Pagan author’s scanty and likely forged comment is preposterous. Even if the passage in Tacitus were genuine, it would be too late and is not from an eyewitness, such that it is valueless in establishing an “historical” Jesus, representing merely a recital of decades-old Christian tradition.

JOSEPHUS
Even if the Josephus passage were authentic, which we have essentially proved it not to be, it nevertheless would represent not an eyewitness account but rather a tradition passed along for at least six decades, long after the purported events. Hence, the TF would possess little if any value in establishing an “historical” Jesus. In any event, it is quite clear that the entire passage in Josephus regarding Christ, the Testimonium Flavianum, is spurious, false and a forgery. Regarding the TF, Remsburg summarizes:

“For nearly sixteen hundred years Christians have been citing this passage as a testimonial, not merely to the historical existence, but to the divine character of Jesus Christ. And yet a ranker smell of forgery was never penned….

SUETONIOUS:
Moving through the standard list of defenses, we come to the Roman historian Suetonius. The passage in Suetonius’s Life of Claudius, dating to around 110 CE, states that the emperor Claudius “drove the Jews out of Rome, who at the suggestion of Chrestus were constantly rioting.” The passage in Latin is as follows:

Claudius Judaeos impulsore Chresto assidue tumultuantes Roma expulit.

We see that the reference is to “Chresto,” not “Christo.” In any case, Claudius reigned from 41-54, while Christ was purported to have been crucified around 30, so the great Jewish sage could not have been in Rome personally at that time. Even such an eager believer and mesmerized apologist as Shirley Jackson Case must admit that Christ himself couldn’t have been at Rome then, that the “natural meaning” of the remark is that “a disturbance was caused by a Jew named Chrestus” living in Rome at the time, and that Suetonius’s “references to Christianity itself are very obscure.”

PLINY:
It is thus possible that the “Christos” or “Anointed” god Pliny’s “Christiani” were following was Serapis himself, the syncretic deity created by the priesthood in the third century BCE. In any case, this god “Christos” was not a man who had been crucified in Judea.

Moreover, like his earlier incarnation Osiris, Serapis—both popular gods in the Roman Empire—was called not only Christos but also “Chrestos,” centuries before the common era. Indeed, Osiris was styled “Chrestos,” centuries before his Jewish copycat Jesus was ever conceived….

In any event, the value of the Pliny letter as “evidence” of Christ’s existence is worthless, as it makes no mention of “Jesus of Nazareth,” nor does it refer to any event in his purported life. There is not even a clue in it that such a man existed. As Taylor remarks, “We have the name of Christ, and nothing else but the name, where the name of Apollo or Bacchus would have filled up the sense quite as well.” Taylor then casts doubt on the authenticity of the letter as a whole, recounting the work of German critics, who “have maintained that this celebrated letter is another instance to be added to the long list of Christian forgeries…” One of these German luminaries, Dr. Semler of Leipsic provided “nine arguments against its authenticity…” He also notes that the Pliny epistle is quite similar to that allegedly written by “Tiberianus, Governor of Syria” to Trajan, which has been universally denounced as a forgery.

LUCIAN:
Nevertheless, given that Lucian’s statement was written near the end of the second century, it seems rather unlikely that he had independent sources of information concerning the historicity of Jesus. Lucian may have relied upon Christian sources, common knowledge, or even an earlier pagan reference (e.g., Tacitus); since Lucian does not specify his sources, we will never know. Just as is the case with Tacitus, it is quite plausible that Lucian would have simply accepted the Christian claim that their founder had been crucified. There is simply no evidence that Lucian ever doubted the historicity of Jesus. Therefore, Lucian’s concern for historical accuracy is not even relevant as Lucian would have had no motive for investigating the matter.

As for McDowell’s other sources for the historicity of Jesus, I think they are inconclusive. There is no evidence that the written works of the church fathers were based on independent sources. Tertullian’s reference to Tiberius is inconclusive, as is Africanus’ references to Thallus. Africanus’ reference to Phlegon is probably an interpolation. The Talmud is too late to be of any value in establishing the historicity of Jesus. Pliny the Younger, Tacitus, and Lucian are not independent witnesses to the historicity of Jesus. Suetonius did not refer to Jesus. And Mara Bar-Serapion’s letter is worthless as a witness to the historicity of Jesus.

Jesus was never in the Old Testment regardless of Christians who want to make it so. Trying to make it so is the Pharisaical trojan horse who after hijacking the following of Jesus exerted influence and treasure into bringing the following back into the fold of the Pharisees and the Mosaic Law which they were loathe to accept because Jesus told them their sacrifices and offering were useless; nevertheless the Pharisees did succeed into abridging the OT and the Nt any accepting the syncing of Jesus of the N with the supernatural God of the Old to appease the followers who were ADAMANT TO MAINTAIN JESUS as the before the during and the after of all that there was to the godhead and so the Pharisees acquiesced to those demands but those demand are spurious. However after 2000 years Christians have become complacent and instead of renouncing the OT as Jesus did, they embraced it but not without including Jesus.

It was a compromise of supernatural proportions versus the common sensical natural man of Jesus and thus we have a meld of “give a little bit” and “take a little bit”…Mythology and Fact and perhaps we can come to a mutual conclusion that everybody can agree on…….So Christians of today are replicas of Pharisees of Jesus day, clones for compromise that relinquish the virtue with make believe.

Christianity and Islam are the largest religions in history, and around half the people in the world consider themselves to be either Christians or Muslims. But Christianity and Islam disagree on fundamental doctrines and practices, so they can’t both be right. Is there a way to judge these two religions? Some people judge religions based on the worst adherents of the religions. Others insist that we should judge religions by their best adherents. However, rather than judging religions by their adherents at all, we should turn to the central figures of the religions. In this video, David Wood compares Muhammad and Jesus.

Published on Apr 29, 2016
Here is the latter half of a presentation I did in Kentucky. In it, I describe what I’ve come to refer to as “The Ephraim Awakening.” It is the plan of YHWH to redeem His divorced Bride. And people from all over the world began to awaken to this reality in about 2009, perhaps not at all “coincidentally” at the same time that the Northern Kingdom’s 2,730 year exile began to come to an end.

Looking for fame and fortune the conspiracist clips a section from the Book and runs with it; and with, parcels off another denominational tangent based on the doctrine devised by the conspiracist gleaned off psychics from ancient days for a ready audience of certain believers.

Whatever conjurations are conjured up there will be believers to fill the pews; whatever lies are fabricated there will be a willing mass to follow. Made to order. For what appeals to particular believers, they are willing to allow their minds to be available for what the conspiracist kneads.

And another tentacle for God arises to tickle a blind humanity who has never heeded the voice of Jesus the one who told you and warned us of the conspiracy trap that perpetuates the tyranny of religion.

This is the web that religion weaves and you the believer are the weaves of the web.

And Jesus says “Get Back To Where You Belong”; stop following false gods of supernaturalism; seek ye within, the God of Humanity…..the Father that is in me is the Father that is in you!

“And everything that God gave Jesus and Jesus gave me, in the day that I was redeemed and Jesus Christ came to inhabit my humanity, he’s given to you. “the Christ who lives in me said he to the Philippians, is the Christ that lives in you. He says live it up. Just know how wealthy you became in the day that your humanity was re-invaded by your creator as revealed by the Redeemer.”

Published on Sep 20, 2016http://www.answeringmuslims.com
An odd but common Muslim argument insists that Jesus prayed like a Muslim, so Christians should pray like Muslims. In this video, David Wood responds by taking a closer look at the prayers of Jesus.

Here’s the text of David’s response:

Hi Gold Man. You’ve never seen a Christian praying on his face because Jesus commanded his followers: “When you pray, you are not to be like the hypocrites; for they love to stand and pray in the synagogues and on the street corners so that they may be seen by men. Truly I say to you, they have their reward in full. But you, when you pray, go into your inner room, close your door and pray to your Father who is in secret, and your Father who sees what is done in secret will reward you” (Matthew 6:5-6). Notice that this is the same book you just cited to show that Jesus prayed like Muslims! Muslims pray in the open so that you may be seen by men. Jesus condemns your prayers! Jesus also said, in the same book you cited: “And when you are praying, do not use meaningless repetition as the Gentiles do, for they suppose that they will be heard for their many words” (Matthew 6:7). What do Muslims do when they pray? They recite memorized prayers in a language most of them don’t understand! Even more hilarious, the exact verse you cited condemns you. Matthew 26:39 reads: “And He went a little beyond them, and fell on His face and prayed, saying, ‘My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from Me; yet not as I will, but as You will.'” Jesus calls God “My Father”! According to the Qur’an (9:30), Jesus is not the Son of God. Indeed, the Qur’an declares that Allah is a father to no one (see 5:18; 19:88-93; and 21:26). So if we believe the verse you cited, Islam is false! Beyond this, Jesus prayed in different positions. John 17:1 states: “Jesus spoke these things; and lifting up His eyes to heaven, He said, ‘Father, the hour has come; glorify Your Son, that the Son may glorify You.'” Jesus prayed while looking up to heaven. I’ve never seen a Muslim pray like this! Notice also, once again, that Jesus calls God “Father,” and declares himself to be the “Son.” So, your “proof” of Islam is something that thoroughly contradicts Islam! Thank you for proving, based on the teachings of Jesus, that Muhammad was a false prophet.

Published on Jul 31, 2016
Here are a bunch of prophecies that Jesus fulfilled. Mathematical analyses of the statistical probabilities of any man fulfilling these by chance reveal that Jesus is legit.
This is part 10 in the lengthy series on Evidence for the Bible. This series is a methodical look at a large variety of subjects including prophecy, archaeology, history, science, contradictions, philosophy, and more! This series is for the thinking person and I hope and pray that it blesses you.
Mike Winger

Published on Sep 26, 2016
Nahed Hattar (ناهض حتر‎‎) was raised as a Christian in Jordan—though he considered himself an atheist. He was recently shot and killed by a Muslim imam for sharing a cartoon mocking the Islamic view of paradise. The cartoon features a jihadi in bed with two of his houris (the virgins Muslim men get to spend eternity deflowering in Jannah).

In the cartoon, Allah says: “Good evening, Abu Saleh. Do you need anything?” The jihadi replies: “Yes Lord, get me a glass of wine and tell Gabriel to bring me some cashews. After that, send me an immortal servant to clean the floor, and take the empty plates with you. Don’t forget to put a door on the tent so that you knock before you enter next time, Your Glory.”

Hattar was arrested for insulting Islam, even though he apologized and said that he was only making fun of ISIS. Following his arrest, he requested security to protect him, but his request was denied. He was subsequently shot to death outside the courthouse.

Westernized Muslims are now insisting that the cartoon Hattar shared has nothing to do with Islam, and that the view of paradise the cartoon mocks is the view of ISIS, not of Muhammad.

In this video, David Wood goes through Islam’s most trusted sources, to see if Muhammad’s view of paradise is different from that of ISIS and al-Qaeda.

Published on Sep 28, 2016
PATREON LINK:https://www.patreon.com/user?u=3615911
Several of you have been asking if I have a Patreon account. I do now! If you want to see more frequent videos, become a patron!

THE TWO TREES Part 1 of 2: The Tree of Life and the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil
Corner Fringe Ministries

Published on Nov 10, 2013
The Two Tree teaching is a two-part study on the Tree of Life and The Tree of Good and Evil. How do these two trees relate to us today and what does it all mean? Listen today!
If you have any questions or comments regarding any of our videos, please feel free to contact us through our website: http://CornerFringe.com
Bible verses covered:
Genesis 2:8-9, 15-17; 3:1-7, 21-24
Deuteronomy 30:15-18
Psalms 107:20; 119:50
Proverbs 3:18
Ezekiel 28:12-17
John 1:14; 10:10
Romans 8:13
2 Corinthians 2:14-17; 14:20
Jude 1:14
Revelation 22:1-2, 12-16

Muslim preachers invite their listeners to Islam. However, when non-Muslims challenge or question the Quran, Muslim preachers often insist that the Quran can only be understood in Arabic. How can Islam be the religion for all people if its central text can only be understood in a single language? In this video, David Wood examines what the Quran says about why it was revealed in Arabic. The answer thoroughly contradicts the Muslim position.

The angel of the LORD/YHWH encamps around those who fear Him,
And rescues them. (Psalm 34:7)

Isaiah 11
11:1
Then a shoot will spring from the stem of Jesse,
And a branch from his roots will bear fruit.
2
The Spirit of the LORD/YHWH will rest on Him,
The spirit of wisdom and understanding,
The spirit of counsel and strength,
The spirit of knowledge and the fear of the LORD/YHWH.
3
And He will delight in the fear of the LORD/YHWH,
And He will not judge by what His eyes see,
Nor make a decision by what His ears hear;
4
But with righteousness He will judge the poor,
And decide with fairness for the afflicted of the earth;
And He will strike the earth with the rod of His mouth,
And with the breath of His lips He will slay the wicked.
5
Also righteousness will be the belt about His loins,
And faithfulness the belt about His waist.

Son of Man is not a title; Son of Man is a metaphorical phrase to explain a mindset; a disposition that declares I, as the Son of Man, am a microcosm of Mankind and how did Jesus know that?

The answer of course is by looking inside himself. In his own head and heart he found every possible trait of character and twist of emotion. His dialogue rings true because Jesus knew that he himself was Everyman. He had only to consult his own soul to imagine how any character would react in a given situation because he—-as a human being—- was also a microcosm of the whole human race and declared in so many ways that every human being born, was so endowed.

The Son of Man on a personal level is a representative of humanity on earth as “Everyman” and a role model for Every other man demonstrating that the Father of Virtue living within is saying and doing and “be-ing” using Jesus as the role model that revolutionized the whole world’s understanding of what should govern humanity’s behaviour.

Published on Oct 14, 2016
Support my videos on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/user?u=3615911
Most Muslims believe that the Torah and the Gospel have been corrupted. Both Allah and Muhammad, however, affirm the inspiration, preservation, and authority of the Torah and the Gospel. In this video, David Wood examines a Hadith where Muhammad once again affirms the Bible.

For more on Islam affirming Christian scriptures, click on this video:

1 John 5:20
20 And we know that the Son of God has come, and has given us understanding so that we may know Him who is true; and we are in Him who is true, in His Son Jesus Christ. This is the true God and eternal life.

Dr. David Wood Proves the Resurrection of Christ
Trinity Apologetics

Published on Sep 17, 2016
David Wood (Ph.D) presents an excellent case for the historicity of Christ’s resurrection from the dead. And these are just a few pieces of evidences – volumes of scholarship have been done on the resurrection! The empty tomb is also very well attested even by the enemies of the disciples. If the disciples stole the body (as the ancient Jews held to) then this would never result in the conversion of Paul (an enemy of the church) and James (the skeptic unbelieving brother of Jesus). And why would the disciples knowingly suffer and die for something they know is a lie? This idea simply cannot account for all the facts.

Christianity would have DIED in the 1st century hadn’t Jesus rose from the dead!

Published on Oct 15, 2016
Support my videos on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/user?u=3615911
Muslims often claim that Islam is the religion of pure submission to Allah. However, in their daily prayers, Muslims say, “As-salamu alaika ay-yuhan nabiy-yu,” which means, “Peace be upon YOU, O Prophet.” Since Muslims are directly addressing Muhammad during their daily prayers, they’re assuming that Muhammad can hear them. This requires the divine attribute of omnipresence on Muhammad’s part.

Because Muslims speak directly to Muhammad during their daily prayers, they can no longer claim that Islam is the religion of pure submission to Allah. Islam is polytheistic, and any Muslim who prays the way Muhammad commanded is guilty of shirk (associating partners with Allah).

Jeremiah 16
14 “Therefore behold, days are coming,” declares the LORD/YHWH, “when it will no longer be said, ‘As the LORD/YHWH lives, who brought up the sons of Israel out of the land of Egypt,’
15 but, ‘As the LORD/YHWH lives, who brought up the sons of Israel from the land of the north and from all the countries where He had banished them.’ For I will restore them to their own land which I gave to their fathers.
16 “Behold, I am going to send for many fishermen,” declares the LORD/YHWH, “and they will fish for them; and afterwards I will send for many hunters, and they will hunt them from every mountain and every hill and from the clefts of the rocks.
17 For My eyes are on all their ways; they are not hidden from My face, nor is their iniquity concealed from My eyes.
18 I will first doubly repay their iniquity and their sin, because they have polluted My land; they have filled My inheritance with the carcasses of their detestable idols and with their abominations.”
19
O LORD/YHWH, my strength and my stronghold,
And my refuge in the day of distress,
To You the nations will come
From the ends of the earth and say,
“Our fathers have inherited nothing but falsehood,
Futility and things of no profit.”
20
Can man make gods for himself?
Yet they are not gods!
21
“Therefore behold, I am going to make them know–
This time I will make them know
My power and My might;
And they shall know that My name is the LORD/YHWH.”

No one is better qualified from a professional sense to critique Dr. Martin’s research on the location of the Temples in Jerusalem than Dr. Leen Ritmeyer. Not only did he work closely with Professor Benjamin Mazar and was the official architect of the archaeological excavation at Jerusalem from 1973 until its closure, but he is now considered by most scholars in the world as the chief authority on the location of the Temple Mount. He teaches in the archaeology department of the University of Leeds in England and is a highly respected lecturer on Temple Mount studies in some of the most prestigious academic institutions and organizations. He could rightfully be called one of the top representatives of the traditional school of Temple experts that place the Temple within the confines of the Haram esh-Sharif (that all scholars have accepted as true, and this also including me until I started to look extensively into the subject in 1995). Until the appearance of my research study, all mainline scholars, historians and archaeologists (and this includes all Rabbis, all Christian priests and preachers and Muslim authorities) accepted without the slightest controversy (and with some expressing a reverence approaching divine inspiration) that the former Temples in Jerusalem were all located in the area of the Haram esh-Sharif.

What I show in my research is that the whole world (for the past 600 years) has been wrong and that the world needs to accept the truth of the documentary and biblical evidences that I give in my book and abridgments so that the truth will finally prevail in this most important issue. It can properly be stated that Dr. Ritmeyer could legitimately be considered a proper and qualified spokesman for all the traditionalists throughout the world who insist that the Temples were located within the precincts of the Haram esh-Sharif. As for me and my research, I am the lone anti-traditionalist who has brought forth the research to prove dogmatically that the world is thoroughly and totally wrong.

On the Web Page of Dr. Leen Ritmeyer is his critique of Dr. Martin’s book The Temples that Jerusalem Forgot and his abridgment found on the ASK Web Page. The critique of Dr. Ritmeyer (produced below) can be read in full at his Web Page at http://www.templemountonline.com . In this rebuttal, Dr. Martin first gives a section of Dr. Ritmeyer’s critique and then comments on that portion. He then follows the archaeologist/architect with every word stated by Dr. Ritmeyer followed by a response from Dr. Martin. The first words of Dr. Ritmeyer are given in the paragraph below, and continue to the end of his critique….